An Apostle in Battle: Paul and Spiritual Warfare in 2 Corinthians 12:1-10 (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament 2.Reihe) 9783161548604, 3161548604

Citation preview

Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament · 2. Reihe Herausgeber / Editor Jörg Frey (Zürich) Mitherausgeber / Associate Editors Markus Bockmuehl (Oxford) · James A. Kelhoffer (Uppsala) Hans-Josef Klauck (Chicago, IL) · Tobias Nicklas (Regensburg) J. Ross Wagner (Durham, NC)

433

Lisa M. Bowens

An Apostle in Battle Paul and Spiritual Warfare in 2 Corinthians 12:1–10

Mohr Siebeck

Lisa M. Bowens, M.T.S. and Th.M. from Duke University Divinity School; PhD in New Testament from Princeton Theological Seminary; currently an Assistant Professor of New Testament at Princeton Theological Seminary.

ISBN 978-3-16-154860-4 ISSN 0340-9570 (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, 2. Reihe) Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de.

© 2017 by Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, Germany. www.mohr.de This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher’s written permission. This applies particularly to reproductions, translations, microfilms and storage and processing in electronic systems. The book was printed by Laupp & Göbel in Gomaringen on non-aging paper and bound by Buchbinderei Nädele in Nehren. Printed in Germany.

For my family, especially my parents, Reginald and Eunice Bowens, and in memory of my grandparents, Lawrence and Martha Bowens, Irving and Nettie McKoy and in memory of a spiritual father Otis Lockett, Sr.

Preface This monograph is a revision of my doctoral dissertation, “Engaging in Battle: Examining Paul’s Cosmology, Epistemology, and Anthropology in the Context of Spiritual Warfare in 2 Corinthians 12:1–10,” which was submitted to the Faculty of Princeton Theological Seminary. I am grateful to the editors of Mohr Siebeck for their helpful suggestions and comments throughout this publication process. I owe the completion of this project to many professors, colleagues, family members, and friends. I must give a very special thanks and appreciation to my committee members: J. Ross Wagner (Chair), Loren Stuckenbruck, Shane Berg, and George Parsenios. Ross Wagner, my Doktorvater, willingly shared his expertise in Paul, read closely many drafts, and constantly challenged me to sharpen my thoughts and my argument. I am very thankful to have had him as my advisor during this journey. The many conversations we engaged in and his reassuring presence enabled me to forge ahead and think creatively. His guidance and words of encouragement have been so instrumental to the completion of this endeavor. The idea for this dissertation originated in Loren Stuckenbruck’s Jewish Apocalyptic Literature course, and I am grateful that he urged me to pursue it. I am equally grateful for his eagerness to share his expertise in Jewish literature and his continual admonition to think ‘outside of the box.’ His readings of scripture are always provocative and challenge me as a Pauline scholar to think about the larger context of Paul’s world. I am also very appreciative of Shane Berg’s enthusiasm, expertise, and interest in religious epistemology, all of which served to spur my own interest in the topic. I am grateful for our many discussions and his advice to ‘challenge assumptions,’ to dig deeper into the text, and to find my own voice. George Parsenios has been a source of constant motivation and inspiration to press on. His faith in my ability means so very much and his untiring and relentless pursuit of knowledge encourages my own quest. Special appreciation goes to Douglas Campbell for his insightful comments and suggestions. I am a thankful beneficiary of his many years of Pauline research, and I am deeply grateful for his encouragement to pursue New Testament study. I am also grateful to Dale Allison, whose comments and suggestions have made this manuscript better in so many ways. I offer many words of thanks to those who have read drafts of this work in its various stages and provided feedback or simply engaged in life-giving conversations with me during this process: James Charlesworth, Christie Chow, Toyin Fabiyi, Elaine James,

VIII

Preface

Nathan Johnson, Craig Keener, Regina Langley, René Pierre-Louis, Jinwook Oh, Mary Schmitt, Love Sechrest, Sonia Waters, SBL Second Corinthians Pauline Theology in the Making Group, PTS NT Colloquium, Rev22 sisterhood, and my dissertation groups. I am especially grateful to Michael Liberman, Jillian Marcantonio, Bill Morrison, Wendy Sample, and Patty Shannon who helped with formatting and indexing. There are also many people who have been instrumental in this academic process such as the Duke Divinity School faculty who, when I began my journey into the academic world of biblical studies, encouraged my pursuit in the study of the New Testament and also challenged me to read scripture with imagination as well as with and for the church. My time at DDS was a transformative experience for which I am grateful and has formed me in so many ways. I am equally thankful to the faculty members of the Bible department at Princeton Theological Seminary, who have modeled for me what it means to be both teacher and academician, to love both the church and the academy. Special appreciation goes to Clift Black who helped me tremendously during my early years at PTS and remains a source of encouragement. I offer special thanks also to Susan Eastman and Beverly Gaventa for their support. Their work on Paul continues to challenge and inspire me. I also extend a warm thank you to Yolanda Pierce whose presence in my life during my time at PTS has been immeasurable. I must also thank President Craig Barnes, Dean James Kay, Dean Shawn Oliver, Cleo LaRue, Betty Angelucci, Marie Grasso, and Kate Skrebutenas, all of whom provided much needed motivation and strength in the final stages of this process. Thanks also to Luke Powery, Peter Paris, and Geddes Hanson for their encouragement. I extend sincere appreciation to the Fund for Theological Education whose presence in my life during this journey made a huge difference through funding and offering safe spaces for important conversations. I am especially grateful for Sharon Fluker and Matthew Williams, whose enthusiasm and counsel have been vital. I am blessed to be a part of the FTE cohort. To my entire family, who is God’s gift to me, I give a special and eternal thanks for prayers, encouragement, and the many times you have offered a listening ear, especially Reggie, Vonnie, Anna, and Stephanie. Most of all, to my parents, Reginald and Eunice Bowens, who have sacrificed so much and have always encouraged me and supported me. Their steadfast faith in God, despite life’s difficult circumstances, has been an anchor for my soul. I also recognize the late Pastor Otis Lockett Sr., who loved the Lord and the word of God with a deep passion and whose inspiring words compelled me to step out on faith. I also honor those beloved saints, old mothers and fathers of the church who never had the opportunity to engage in formal theological education but whose unwavering faith in God shaped my own faith. To God in whom I live, move, and have my very being I offer praise. Soli Deo Gloria.

Table of Contents Preface ....................................................................................................... VII List of Abbreviations .................................................................................XIII

Chapter 1: Introduction................................................................................... 1 1.1 Proem ........................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Snapshot of 2 Corinthians 12:1–10 and Its Context ..................................... 2 1.3 Paul’s Himmelsreise in Recent Interpretations ............................................ 3 1.3.1 Garland, Murphy O’Connor, and Schweitzer .................................... 3 1.3.2 Baur, Plummer, and Windisch ........................................................... 6 1.3.3 Schmithals and Reitzenstein .............................................................. 8 1.3.4 Käsemann and Betz .......................................................................... 10 1.3.5 Lincoln and Tabor ............................................................................ 16 1.3.6 Gooder and Wallace ......................................................................... 19 1.4 An Epigrammatic Survey of Early Christian Interpreters .......................... 24 1.4.1 Paul’s Ascent in the Writings of the Church Fathers ....................... 24 1.4.2 Cosmological Affinities Between Paul and the Early Church Fathers ............................................................................................. 30 1.5 Argument of this Study .............................................................................. 33 1.5.1 A Fresh Approach: Paul’s Cosmic Battle Imagery .......................... 33 1.5.2 Definition of Terms .......................................................................... 35 1.5.2.1 Cosmic, Cosmological, and Apocalyptic ......................... 35 1.5.2.2 Epistemology and Theological Anthropology .................. 37 1.5.3 Methodology .................................................................................... 38 1.5.3.1 A Word Regarding Paul’s Opponents .............................. 41 1.6 Summary .................................................................................................... 43

X

Table of Contents

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia: Martial Language and the Cosmological, Epistemological, and Anthropological Nexus ......... 45 2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 45 2.2 Prelude to War: The Apostle’s Appeal to the Meekness and Gentleness of Christ (10:1–2) ....................................................................................... 46 2.3 The Significance of the Military Imagery .................................................. 50 2.3.1 Paul’s Use of κατὰ σάρκα in 2 Corinthians ...................................... 52 2.3.2 Paul’s Military Language in 10–13 .................................................. 59 2.3.3 Summary of Military Imagery.......................................................... 69 2.4 Arena of Warfare: The Mind and Knowledge of God 10:4–6.................... 70 2.4.1 Noēma (Νόηµα)................................................................................ 73 2.4.2 Additional Epistemological Terms in 2 Corinthians 10–13 ............. 77 2.4.3 Paul’s Use of Genesis 1–3 and Traditions Surrounding Genesis 1–3 ................................................................................................... 79 2.5 The War Scroll ........................................................................................... 84 2.6 1QS Treatise of the Two Spirits 3.13–4.26 ................................................ 88 2.7 Excursus: An Additional Word on the War Scroll, The Treatise of the Two Spirits, and Paul ................................................................................. 96 2.8 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document ...................................................... 97 2.8.1 Community Hymns .......................................................................... 98 2.8.2 The Aramaic Levi Document ......................................................... 102 2.8.3 Paul, 1QHa (Community Hymns), and the Aramaic Levi Document ...................................................................................... 105 2.8.4 Teacher Hymns .............................................................................. 107 2.8.5 Paul and the Teacher Hymns .......................................................... 112 2.9 Summary and Concluding Thoughts ........................................................ 120

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment ............... 123 3.1 Introduction .............................................................................................. 123 3.2 Interpreting the Passage – 2 Corinthians 12:1–10 .................................... 124

Table of Contents

XI

3.2.1 Textual Analysis 12:1–4 ................................................................ 130 3.2.2 Textual Analysis 12:5–6 ................................................................ 144 3.2.3 Textual Analysis 12:7 .................................................................... 148 3.2.3.1 Paul’s Depiction of Satan .............................................. 165 3.2.3.2 Yperairōmai (Ὑπεραίρωµαι): An Alternative Interpretation ................................................................ 175 3.2.3.3 Opposition to Earthly Descents and Heavenly Ascents .. 181 3.2.3.3.1 Daniel .............................................................. 181 3.2.3.3.2 Apocalypse of Abraham .................................. 183 3.2.3.3.3 Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah ................ 185 3.2.3.3.4 Rabbinic and Ηekhalot Literature .................... 187 3.2.3.3.5 Summary of 12:1–7 ......................................... 189 3.2.4 Textual Analysis 12:8–10 .............................................................. 191 3.2.4.1 Paul’s Prayer ................................................................. 191 3.2.4.2 God’s Response ............................................................. 199 3.2.4.3 Paul’s Boasting and Contentment in Weaknesses .......... 201 3.2.4.4 Summary and Conclusion of 12:8–10 ............................ 203 3.3 Paul’s Heavenly Journey: Real, Literary, or Both? .................................. 204 3.4 Bringing it All Together: Paul’s Ascent, the War Scroll, the Treatise of the Two Spirits, 1QHa, and Prayers of Deliverance ................................. 207 3.5 Excursus: Mithras Liturgy ........................................................................ 210 3.6 Snapshots of Chapter 13:13:1–4, 13......................................................... 213 3.7 Paul Presents His Life as an Example ...................................................... 216 3.8 Summary and Concluding Thoughts ........................................................ 220

Chapter 4: Conclusions............................................................................... 223 Bibliography.............................................................................................. 229 Index of Ancient Sources .......................................................................... 243 Index of Modern Authors .......................................................................... 256 Index of Subjects ....................................................................................... 259

List of Abbreviations AB ACW ANF AJ AR BHT Bib Bib Int BJ BJS BZ CBQ CD CSCO DJD DSSR EKK FRLANT GAP HBS HNTC HTR IBC ICC IEJ Int JBL JJS JSHRZ JSNT JSP JSPSup JTS JU LCL LSJ LF

Anchor Bible Ancient Christian Writers Ante-Nicene Fathers Josephus, Antiquitates Judaicae Archiv für Religionswissenchaft Beiträge zur Historischen Theologie Biblica Biblical Interpretation Josephus, Bellum Judaicum Brown Judaic Studies Biblische Zeitschrift Catholic Biblical Quarterly Damascus Document Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium Discoveries in the Judaean Desert Dead Sea Scrolls Reader Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments Guides to Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha Herders Biblische Studien Harper’s New Testament Commentary Harvard Theological Review Interpretation Bible Commentary International Critical Commentary Israel Exploration Journal Interpretation Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of Jewish Studies Jüdische Schriften aus Hellenistisch-Römischer Zeit Journal for the Study of the New Testament Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha: Supplement Series Journal of Theological Studies Judentum und Umwelt Loeb Classical Library Liddell, Henry George and Robert Scott. A Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1888. Library of the Fathers

XIV NAC NCBC NIB NIBC NICNT NIGTC NovT NovTSup NPNF NTS ӦTBK OTP PRS PTSMS PVTG ResQ RSB S-CJ SNTW SBLDS SP SVTP ThHK TSAJ VT WBC WUNT ZTK

List of Abbreviations New American Commentary New Cambridge Bible Commentary New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary New International Bible Commentary New International Commentary on the New Testament New International Greek Testament Commentary Novum Testamentum Novum Testamentum, Supplements The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers New Testament Studies Ӧkumenischer Taschenbuchkommentar zum Neuen Testament Old Testament Pseudepigrapha Perspectives in Religious Studies Pittsburgh Theological Seminary Monograph Series Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti Graece Restoration Quarterly Religious Studies Bulletin Stone-Campbell Journal Studies in the New Testament and Its World Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series Sacra Pagina Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha Theologischer Handkommentar zum Neuen Testament Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum Vetus Testamentum Word Biblical Commentary Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche

Chapter 1

Introduction 1.1 Proem The research presented in this study has four overarching primary concerns: 1) examining the epistemological, cosmological, and anthropological perspectives that undergird Paul’s mystical experience in 2 Corinthians 12:1–10; 2) concentrating on the ascent’s connection to the overall argument of 2 Corinthians 10–13; 3) defining the significance of the apostle’s heavenly journey for him and his audience; and 4) addressing the relationship of Paul’s ascent to the apostle’s larger Jewish and Greco-Roman contexts. The pericope’s relationship to the rest of the letter and the broader Hellenistic environment and its significance for Paul and the Corinthians are intricately linked to the martial imagery with which the apostle begins chapter 10. Much recent research focuses on the heavenly voyage solely as a response to Paul’s opponents and although recognizing the existence of martial imagery in 10:3–6, recent discussions neither examine sufficiently the persistence of this martial language in the remaining chapters of the letter nor relate this warfare imagery to the apostle’s heavenly expedition. It will be shown in the following analysis that delineating this military language is vital for understanding the apostle’s ascent to the third heaven and for grasping Paul’s description of a broader cosmic contest that undergirds the problems in Corinth. The combat motif demonstrates that Paul both views and presents the Corinthian situation as greater than the presence of his opponents. By utilizing martial imagery, the apostle describes an existing supernatural struggle around the knowledge of God. The warfare terminology of chapter 10 anticipates his ascent, in which he faces satanic conflict, a conflict that illustrates the reality of an apocalyptic contest. This apocalyptic contest precipitates the apostle’s prayer in 12:8, an invocation which corresponds to other petitions during this time period. Prayers of deliverance from evil forces become more prevalent around the first century, and this study contends that Paul’s request fits into this genre. As will be discussed below, the apocalyptic contest foregrounded by the apostle’s martial language grants insight into Paul’s view of the human being, humanity’s place in the cosmos, and how humanity gains access to knowledge of and from God.

2

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.2 Snapshot of 2 Corinthians 12:1–10 and Its Context 1.2 Snapshot of 2 Corinthians

To say that 2 Corinthians 12:1–10 has generated considerable discussion and debate is an understatement. This pericope, which includes Paul’s vision, heavenly journey, and thorn in the flesh, has been labeled by interpreters as “bizarre,”1 “abstruse and esoteric,”2 and “one of the more intriguing passages in the letters of Paul.”3 To make interpretive matters even more difficult, these verses occur in the midst of the last four chapters of 2 Corinthians, chapters described by many as argumentative in nature. Paul’s tone seems harsher in this part of the letter and his criticisms of his opponents more direct and severe.4 He also utilizes a number of rhetorical tools such as pleading and paranesis, sarcasm, threat, and condemnation.5 Thus, Paul’s “bizarre” experience appears in this larger rhetorically complicated section, 2 Corinthians 10–13.6 In regard to the difficulties in this portion of the letter, Hans Dieter Betz observes, “II Corinthians 10–13 remains one of the most puzzling passages of the Pauline correspondence.”7 Betz’s observation of the challenging nature of 2 Corinthians 10–13 underscores the complexity in interpreting 2 Corinthians 12:1–10. One must not only examine the pericope itself but also the context, albeit a difficult one, in which it appears. In the opening verses of 2 Corinthians 10, Paul emphatically addresses himself to the Corinthians (αὐτὸς δὲ ἐγὼ Παῦλος), highlighting that it is he himself who urges them and no one else. This emphatic speech, along with the way he characterizes himself in these verses, leads most interpreters to see Paul as “writing on the defense.” He defends himself against charges of being weak 1 Robert M. Price, “Punished in Paradise: (An Exegetical Theory on 2 Corinthians 12:1– 10),” JSNT 7 (1980): 33–40. 2 Alan F. Segal, Paul the Convert: The Apostolate and Apostasy of Saul the Pharisee (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990), 36. 3 James D. Tabor, Things Unutterable: Paul’s Ascent to Paradise in its Greco-Roman, Judaic, and Early Christian Contexts (Lanham: University Press of America, 1986), 1. 4 Sze-kar Wan, Power in Weakness: Conflict and Rhetoric in Paul’s Second Letter to the Corinthians (Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 2000), 128. 5 Jan Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, SP 8 (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1999), 327. 6 The argumentative tone of 2 Corinthians 10–13 causes a number of commentators to view this section as distinct from the previous chapters. However, as the subsequent analysis will show, although Paul’s tenor takes on a harsher character in these final chapters, he repeatedly returns to themes in chapters 1–9. Consequently, much of what Paul says in 10–13 is illuminated by these previous chapters. For the sake of our discussion, we will assume that these chapters belong to the same letter. Murray J. Harris (The Second Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text, NIGTC [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005], 8–51) presents a detailed discussion on the various partition theories for this letter. 7 Hans Dieter Betz, Paul’s Apology, II Corinthans 10–13, and the Socratic Tradition, ed. Wilhelm H. Wuellner (Berkeley: The Center for Hermeneutical Studies in Hellenistic and Modern Culture, 2nd Colloquy on 5 December 1970, 1975), 1.

1.3 Paul’s Himmelsreise in Recent Interpretations

3

when present and bold when he is away (10:1, 10–11). Moreover, he faces accusations of walking or living according to the flesh, a charge he vehemently denies (10:2–3). The notion of war, which also appears in these opening verses (10:3–6), further underscores the view that Paul defends himself against his opponents and to the Corinthians. Chapters 10–13 are seen by most commentators as a defense letter or apology for his apostolic authority.8 It is within this defensive framework that interpreters primarily understand Paul’s ascent (12:1–10). Yet the following investigation will show that to posit Paul’s ascent as merely another tool with which Paul defends himself against his opponents does not do justice to the significance of this experience. Such a perspective divorces the importance of this episode from Paul’s overall theological argument in this section of the letter. The apocalyptic/cosmic warfare language with which Paul begins chapter 10 sets the framework for the remaining discussion and suggests that his ascent cannot be reduced to the sole purpose of bolstering his apostolic claims against his opponents. The martial imagery in 10:3–6 does not merely depict a defensive posture but provides a glimpse into satanic conflict.

1.3 Paul’s Himmelsreise in Recent Interpretations 1.3 Paul’s Himmelsreise in Recent Interpretations

1.3.1 Garland, Murphy O’Connor, and Schweitzer It is crucial to provide a careful history of the research of 2 Corinthians 12:1– 10 in view of the interpretive questions put forward and omitted in the past regarding the text’s function, language, and importance. This detailed survey 8 A number of scholars view the letter in this manner. Among them are William Baird, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Knox Preaching Guides, ed. John H. Hayes (Atlanta: John Knox, 1980); Paul Barnett, “Paul, Apologist to the Corinthians,” in Paul and the Corinthians: Studies on a Community in Conflict: Essays in Honor of Margaret Thrall, eds. Trevor J. Burke and J. Keith Elliott, NovTSup 109 (Leiden: Brill, 2003); Ernest Best, Second Corinthians, IBC (Atlanta: John Knox, 1987); John Calvin, The Second Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians and the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, Calvin’s New Testament Commentaries 10, eds. David W. Torrance and Thomas F. Torrance, trans. T. A. Small (Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1964); Victor P. Furnish, II Corinthians, AB 32A (New York: Doubleday, 1984); Andrew Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet: Studies in the Role of the Heavenly Dimension in Paul’s Thought with Special References to His Eschatology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981); Margaret M. Mitchell, “The Corinthian Correspondence and the Birth of Pauline Hermeneutics” in Paul and the Corinthians: Studies on a Community in Conflict: Essays in Honor of Margaret Thrall, eds. Trevor J. Burke and J. Keith Elliott, NovTSup 109 (Leiden: Brill, 2003); John Howard Schütz, Paul and the Anatomy of Apostolic Authority (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2007); Tabor, Things Unutterable; Frances M. Young and David F. Ford, Meaning and Truth in Second Corinthians (Eugene: Wipf & Stock, 1987).

4

Chapter 1: Introduction

is also needed in order to unveil common presuppositions and assumptions adhered to in various explanations of this text in modern times. Many recent interpreters view this passage as part of Paul’s foolish speech in which he reluctantly boasts of his revelations and visions in order to validate his apostolic authority to his Corinthian audience. 9 In fact, a survey of a number of commentaries and articles on this passage reveals a common line of interpretation in regard to 2 Corinthians 12:1–10. One frequent interpretation is that Paul only shares this experience because his opponents boast of their own visions and revelations. If they had not boasted about their own experiences, Paul would not have shared his. According to some scholars, Paul presents this ascent account to show that visions and revelations, while important to his opponents’ idea of apostleship, are, in his view, no real proof of authentic apostleship. David Garland represents this view well when he writes, “[for Paul] visions have nothing to do with authenticating an apostle.” 10 He asserts, “Paul rehearses this extraordinary episode in a way that only stresses how useless it is to prove anything about him.”11 For Garland and others, Paul’s account demonstrates the insignificance of this event. Moreover, Paul’s reluctance to tell of his ascent and his hesitation to boast about it indicates that he believes that visions and revelations are insignificant, or at the very least only important to him personally and not to be shared with others.12 The following quote by Jerome Murphy-O’Connor calls attention to the relationship between Paul’s account and his opponents’ claims. Murphy-O’Connor also highlights the ascent’s unimportance to the apostle and the personal nature of the encounter. He writes, Once again underlining the pointlessness of boasting, Paul turns to the question of visions and revelations, on which his opponents laid such emphasis (12:1). It is neither a proof of 9 Along with viewing the letter as a defense speech, many commentators also agree with the designation of a Fool’s Speech, though they differ on where the speech begins and ends. Among those following this trajectory are William Baird, “Visions, Revelation, and Ministry: Reflections on 2 Cor 12:1–5 and Gal 1:11–17,” JBL 104 (1985): 653; Paul Barnett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 555; Furnish, II Corinthians, 539; Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 828; Ralph P. Martin, 2 Corinthians, WBC 40 (Waco: Word, 1985), 394; J. Paul Sampley, Second Letter to the Corinthians, NIB 11 (Nashville: Abingdon, 2000), 162; Margaret E. Thrall, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, ICC 47 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000), 2:654. 10 David E. Garland, 2 Corinthians, NAC 29 (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1999), 512; see also Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet, 77. 11 Garland, 2 Corinthians, 509. At the same time, however, Garland writes that “the incident was a cherished, life changing event for Paul; but it was also highly personal and not something he freely shared with others nor something about which he would brag” (511). 12 Charles K. Barrett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, HNTC (New York: Harper & Row, 1973) 34, 310; Furnish, II Corinthians, 544; Garland, 2 Corinthians, 509, 511–512; Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet, 77; Schütz, Paul and the Anatomy of Apostolic Authority, 238.

1.3 Paul’s Himmelsreise in Recent Interpretations

5

authentic ministry nor beneficial to the community. Unless one is prepared to lie or to embroider wildly, it is extremely difficult to speak ironically about such experiences. Paul gets around the difficulty very neatly by writing of himself in the third person (12:2–5), thereby distancing himself from the episode…. By attributing it to someone else Paul underlines the irrelevance of the experience for his ministry. It did not change him in any way and it did not furnish him with any information which he could use. The unstated critique of his opponents is obvious. If their experience was the same as Paul’s, it contributed nothing. If their experience was something they could talk about, it was less ineffable than his.13

Like Garland, Murphy-O’Connor asserts that the apostle’s heavenly journey adds nothing to his ministry. He maintains that the experience also holds no value for the community and that Paul’s use of the third person accentuates its irrelevancy. His emphasis on the ascent’s insignificance to the community and to Paul’s ministry further suggests that he views the event as personal in character. Paul depicts the encounter in a manner that shows that these types of episodes add nothing to one’s life and are not worth mentioning. And if one does mention them, they must not be all that significant. To other interpreters, however, Paul recounts this excursion either to show that his visions and revelations are superior to those of his opponents and/or that this event makes him superior to his opponents. After all, he makes it to the third heaven and hears words not fit for human beings to speak.14 In his early 20th century work, The Mysticism of the Apostle Paul, Albert Schweitzer’s sums up well the latter point of view: But the high importance which Paul always attached to [the ascent] is to be judged from the fact that in his struggle to vindicate his Apostolic authority he makes reference to it, holding it to be a unique distinction, from which must at once be evident his equality with the other Apostles, if not indeed his superiority to them. It was to Paradise that Enoch was translated when he was rapt away (Enoch lx.8, lxx.3). Paul had thus had an experience comparable to that of these pious men of early times, and remained for a time in the place which he visited! Which of the original Apostles had been granted such a favour!15

For Schweitzer and others who adhere to these positions, Paul’s heavenly rapture makes him superior to his challengers. These perspectives reflect the 13 Jerome Murphy-O’Connor, The Theology of the Second Letter to the Corinthians (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 117–118. 14 Ferdinand C. Baur, Paul the Apostle of Jesus Christ: His Life and Works, His Epistles and Teachings (1873–1875; repr., Peabody: Hendrickson, 2003), 1:291; Wilhelm Bousset, “Der Zweite Brief an die Korinther,” in Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments: neu übersetzt und für die Gegenwart erklärt, ed. J. Weiss (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1907), 2:209; Alfred Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, ICC (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1915), 339; Richard Reitzenstein, Hellenistic Mystery-Religions: Their Basic Ideas and Significance, trans. J. E. Steely, PTSMS 15 (Pittsburgh: Pickwick, 1978), 467; Hans Windisch, Der Zweite Korintherbrief (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1924), 368. 15 Albert Schweitzer, The Mysticism of Paul the Apostle, trans. William Montgomery (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998; repr. London: A. & C. Black, 1931), 137.

6

Chapter 1: Introduction

broader prevailing view that Paul offers this account as part of his defense against the false apostles. However, the contention of this study is that the importance of the ascent cannot be viewed as a mere response to his opponents. To see the ascent in this manner reduces the weight of the experience for Paul’s larger theological argument. 1.3.2 Baur, Plummer, and Windisch For some scholars who view the apostle’s heavenly rapture in light of his opponents, the naming of the false apostles holds the key for understanding Paul’s ascent. That is, the opponents’ identities shape their view of the Corinthian situation. For instance, Ferdinand C. Baur maintains that Paul’s rivals were Judaizers who questioned Paul’s authority. At the same time, Baur notices the absences of reference to the law in the letter, stating, We should have expected that the Apostle would have taken as the subject of his objection, the principles propagated by the Judaising opponents, but the contents of his Epistle do not carry out this expectation. The Jewish doctrines of the absolute value of the Mosaic law, and the necessity of its observance for salvation, are no where combated as they are in the Epistles to the Galatians and the Romans, and there is no mention made of the law, and all that depends upon it.16

In the quote above Baur recognizes that the letter itself contains no explicit reference to Paul’s opponents as Judaizers. Yet he claims that this must be their identity for these are the rivals the apostle faces in other congregations.17 These opponents coupled their “special zeal” for the law with an attack on Paul’s authority.18 Baur surmises, The opponents not only worked against [Paul’s] authority, but also called in question his merit of being the special founder of the Corinthian church. They indeed came to Corinth after the Apostle, but as they did not acknowledge Paul as a true Apostle, as Χριστοῦ ὄντα, they assumed to themselves the glory properly belonging to him, at least in so far as they pretended to have been the first to plant true Christianity.19

For Baur, the false apostles were connected to Peter and the original apostles and arrive in Corinth to usurp Paul’s apostolic role. Baur takes the phrase super-apostles as a reference to the original twelve disciples and views Paul’s opponents as delegates of Peter and the twelve. 20 The twelve disciples and Paul’s opponents could appeal to knowing Jesus in the flesh and therefore substantiate their claim to apostolic legitimacy. One way that Paul choοses to combat their claim is to share his visions and revelations. According to Baur, Paul 16

Baur, Paul the Apostle of Jesus Christ, 1:270–1. Ibid., 1:131–151, especially 1:133; see also 1:269. 18 Ibid., 1:277. 19 Ibid., 1:287. 20 Ibid., 1:288–289. 17

1.3 Paul’s Himmelsreise in Recent Interpretations

7

“could only set an inward spiritual experience against the outward material experiences of the rest of the Apostles.” 21 Although Paul shares this divine encounter to prove that he is just as good as the twelve, his visions and revelations are not good enough for the false apostles. For Paul’s rivals, these experiences “could make no claim to objective truth, in comparison with the outward matter of fact relations in which the other Apostles had lived with Jesus.”22 Therefore, Baur declares that while Paul’s experiences may have been real to him, they could not trump his opponents’ claims because these visions were personal and belonged to the “sphere of [Paul’s] own immediate consciousness.”23 Even though this heavenly journey is important to Paul and he discloses it to combat his opponents, it does not serve to enhance his credibility as an apostle. Like Baur, Alfred Plummer argues that Paul recounts his ascent because of his opponents. He maintains that, similar to the Damascus flight, Paul’s ascent had been used as a way to attack him since his rivals thought these experiences illustrated his delusion and his madness.24 In the face of opposition, then, Paul affirms the reality of the event to the Corinthians. Plummer eloquently states that Paul “lifts the veil which usually covers the details of the most sacred moments of his life and allows the Corinthians to see enough to convince them that the revelations of which he has claimed to be the recipient were intensely and supremely real.”25 Plummer focuses on the genuine nature of the event and on the false apostles as the reason for its narration. But in contrast to other interpreters, he does not believe that the false apostles also claimed to have had visions. Consequently, he does not adhere to the view that Paul relates these experiences to show the superiority of his visions and revelations. 26 Hans Windisch, who offers a variation on the perspectives presented by Baur and Plummer, avers that Paul does not share his ascent episode in response to his opponents’ boasting of their visions and revelations. In fact, Windisch does not believe that the topic played an important role in the Corinthian congregation at all. He writes, Daß auch die Gegner solcher Gesichte sich rühmen können, ist hier nirgends angedeutet – die Meinung, daß Visionen in Kor. besonders gepflegt und besonders hoch gewertet wurden, kann durch unseren Text nicht gestützt werden…. Das fehlen des Artikels macht es unwahrscheinlich, daß [Paulus] hier ein Thema anschlage, das in Kor. bereits eine ominöse Rolle spielte.27

21

Ibid., 1:291. Ibid. 23 Ibid., 1:292. 24 Plummer, Commentary on the Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 338. 25 Ibid., 339. 26 Ibid., 339–340. 27 Windisch, Der Zweite Korintherbrief, 368. 22

8

Chapter 1: Introduction

For Windisch, Paul does not respond to an issue already under discussion in Corinth but, in effect, continues the list he began in 11:22 where he enumerates his merits. After providing an overview of his sufferings and worries, Paul resumes in 12:1 from where he left off in chapter 11. Windisch eloquently writes of the comparisons he sees the apostle making by sharing his revelatory experiences. In essence, Paul continues the pattern “Are they … I too” in his heavenly journey narrative. Wie kommt er dann auf diesen Gegenstand hier zu sprechen? Die natürlichste Antwort ist, daß er mit 121 ff. gewissermaßen den 1123b fallen gelassenen faden wieder aufnimmt. Er began 1122 seine wirklichen Vorzüge zusammenzutragen, schweifte dann aber ab zu seinen Leiden und Sorgen; mit dem Thema “Gesichte und Offenbarungen” leitet er nun wieder zurück zu den Begnadigungen, deren er sich rühmen kann; und wenn die erste Reihe der Auszeichnungen von dem Gedanken, “Sie – ich auch”, die zweite von dem “Sie – ich auch noch viel mehr” getragen war (1122–1123), so ist jetzt das Motto entweder “Sie – ich in ganz unvergleichlich reicherem Maße” oder wahrscheinlicher “ich allein”.28

Windisch posits that Paul’s visions and revelations are a “third round” of comparisons in which Paul highlights his own distinctive claim to these experiences. Paul professes to be more than the false apostles and distinguished from them in regard to these events because he alone journeys to the divine realms. Unlike other scholars, Windisch does not believe the false apostles actually claimed revelatory encounters. But he does maintain that Paul only shares his experience because of his rivals. “Auch was er verrät, schreibt er nur gezwungen, weil er es zur Sicherung seiner Autorität geltend machen muß.”29 Here again Paul presents the account to secure his apostolic claim. 1.3.3 Schmithals and Reitzenstein Unlike Baur, Walter Schmithals argues that Paul’s opponents were Jewish Christian gnostic missionaries and not Judaizers who held a Pharisaic theology. He asserts that Jewish Gnosticism existed along with “orthodox” Judaism which included Pharisees, Sadducees, apocalypticists, Essenes, and other groups. 30 As gnostics, Paul’s opponents devalued the body, causing them to deny the resurrection and to despise suffering. In contrast, they emphasized the heavenly Christ, not the earthly Jesus, and as libertine pneumatics they believed that redemption comes from knowledge. Their practice of ecstatic raptures compels Paul to boast of his own ecstatic experiences.31 Interestingly,

28

Ibid. Ibid. 30 Walter Schmithals, Gnosticism in Corinth: An Investigation of the Letters to the Corinthians, trans. John E. Steely (Nashville: Abingdon, 1971), 296–297. 31 Ibid., 210. 29

1.3 Paul’s Himmelsreise in Recent Interpretations

9

Schmithals maintains that because the apostle feels forced to engage in boasting, the ascent passage is “permeated with bitterness.”32 Paul’s heavenly journey foreshadows what he will be in the future and not what he is in the present. Thus, Paul uses the third person to distinguish between his present self and his future self. For Schmithals, this distinction is the genius of Paul’s ascent presentation. 33 Unlike his gnostic opponents who believe they already live in Paradise, the apostle separates the future from the present. Schmithals contends that in his heavenly rapture Paul is the ἄνθρωπος ἐν Χριστῷ who he will one day become and already has been temporarily, fourteen years earlier, in a moment of most marvelous and exalted experience. Thus the modesty of the apostle is the attitude of the believer who knows about his future without having it in his possession.34

This quote emphasizes the proleptic nature of Paul’s supernatural encounter. In addition, Paul’s inability to determine whether the heavenly rapture took place in the body or out of the body illustrates his intention to disabuse the Corinthians of their emphasis on raptures that they believe take place out of the body.35 Richard Reitzenstein follows Baur’s view that Paul’s opponents hail from the Petrine community. 36 He writes that the super-apostles “in comparison with whom Paul utters his ὑπὲρ ἐγώ actually are the Twelve, or, in our particular case, Peter.”37 For Reitzenstein, the Petrine origin of the super-apostles is important because it provides the reason for Paul’s inclusion of his heavenly journey. In his eyes, Paul relates his ascent narrative to illustrate that he is “not inferior to the original apostles,”38 for his heavenly rapture is evidence of his apostolic equality with the Twelve. Reitzenstein bases this interpretation on his belief that in the ascent Paul stands in the tradition of the pneumatics. The ascent reveals that Paul is “a divine being and in spite of his earthly body is caught up into another world which alone has value and truth.”39 As the previous quote illustrates, Reitzenstein argues that Paul is a gnostic.40 And as a gnostic the apostle is aware of the “weak man and the deity in him” as well as the

32

Ibid. Ibid., 212. 34 Ibid. 35 Ibid., 216–217. 36 Reitzenstein, Hellenistic Mystery-Religions, 467. 37 Ibid., 468. 38 Ibid., 469. 39 Ibid., 83. 40 Ibid., 84. In fact, Reitzenstein writes that “We encounter in [Paul] the beginnings of that basic Hellenistic consciousness, and the religio-historical way of considering these matters may place him in this course of development not as the first, but perhaps as the greatest of all the gnostics” (84; emphasis mine). 33

10

Chapter 1: Introduction

“duality of being.”41 Paul’s Hellenistic understanding of γνῶσις as mystery and divine revelation underscores the importance of the ascent. According to Reitzenstein, Paul’s experience grants him divine authority. He observes: [Paul] can base his claim, not to stand beneath the original apostles but rather above them, upon this vision only if both he himself and his community are permeated with the Hellenistic (and thus originally Oriental), not the Jewish, evaluation of this non-mediated vision of God – and if the Petrine party at Corinth does not have something similar to relate about their chief.42

Reitzenstein contends that Paul’s understanding of γνῶσις as a “non-mediated vision of God” must have been a shared understanding with his audience and the super-apostles for Paul’s appeal to his ascent to make sense. This “nonmediated vision of God” bestowed authority and divine approval upon Paul establishing that the apostle is not inferior in γνῶσις to the original apostles. For Reitzenstein, as well as for the other scholars presented above, Paul’s opponents are in some way the reason for his sharing the ascent episode. Even though these interpreters do consider the larger exegetical context of Paul’s heavenly journey, for them its inclusion in the letter rests primarily upon the presence of Paul’s rivals.43 They do not relate the ascent to the military imagery in chapter 10 nor do they argue for a relationship between the ascent and the satanic presence in the Corinthian congregations as I will do in the following pages. For these interpreters, Paul’s supernatural experience primarily serves the purpose of proving his superiority to or at least equality with the false or super-apostles. But to view the ascent’s primary purpose as “trumping” his opponents is to miss important links between this encounter and Paul’s framework of cosmic warfare and satanic opposition in chapter 10. 1.3.4 Käsemann and Betz Two other authors with immense influence on the modern interpretation of this passage deserve mention here, Ernst Käsemann and Hans Dieter Betz. Ernst Käsemann, in his work Die Legitimität des Apostels: Eine Untersuchung zu 2 Korinther 10–13, argues that the central issue of 2 Corinthians 10–13 revolves around different perspectives of apostleship. The opponents of Paul, he sur-

41

Ibid., 83. Ibid., 87 (emphasis his). 43 Some of these interpreters, like Reitzenstein, do consider the even larger context of 2 Corinthians, such as the wider Greco-Roman world. For example, Reitzenstein looks at texts, such as the Mithras Liturgy and Philo, to compare Paul’s experience. Yet in relation to the ascent, the examination of these texts still serves the purpose of illustrating that the primary reason for its inclusion is the opponents. 42

1.3 Paul’s Himmelsreise in Recent Interpretations

11

mises, are Jewish pneumatics who work signs and wonders, which in their reasonings constitute legitimate criteria for apostolic authority.44 Indeed, he regards 12:12 as originating with Paul’s opponents and as providing a significant window into the conflict. The following quote highlights what Käsemann takes to be the opponents’ view of apostolic authority and Paul’s lack of charismatic signs. He writes, Das ergibt sich schon aus dem gegnerischem Munde entstammenden Stichwort der σηµεῖα τοῦ ἀποστόλου in 12:12. Denn Inhalt dieser »Apostelmerkmale« ist offensichtlich die Fähigkeit zum Wundertun.… Der Zweifel am Vorhandensein der Apostelzeichen verdächtigt also wiederum das Pneumatikertum des Paulus. So sieht dieser sich weiter veranlaßt, seine ἐξουσία zu verteidigen, da man ihm vorgeworfen hat, er dürfe es nicht auf θαρρεῖν, τολµῆσαι, λογίζεσθαι, πεποίθησις ankommen lassen. ἐξουσία und πνεῦµα sind jedoch Wechselbegriffe. Darin besteht also die vermeintliche Schwachheit des Apostels: Er soll kein rechter Pneumatiker sein.45

Käsemann’s words focus on his notion of the central issue of these chapters, the relationship between signs and wonders and apostleship. Paul’s opponents doubt his pneumatic qualities and so this becomes the alleged weakness of the apostle – he is not the right kind of pneumatic. Furthermore, similar to Baur, Käsemann asserts that Paul’s opponents are the original apostles. Paul lacks both pneumatic ability and appropriate apostolic credentials: he is not one of the original twelve. Hence, Käsemann insists that the struggle evolves around Paul’s lack of signs, lack of connection with the original apostles, and lack of connection with Jesus. He maintains: Damit sind die Gründe des Kampfes klar geworden: Es geht in c. 10ff. wirklich »vor allem um den echt christlichen Begriff der apostolischen Auktorität«. Das unterscheidet nach Ansicht der Gegner die Urapostel von Paulus: Die ersteren haben einen sachlich wie historisch fest umrissenen »Kanon«, der dem letzteren mangelt. Ihr Stand ist durch die Sendung Jesu, durch aufweisbare »Apostelzeichen« und durch die in der Unterhaltsaufbringung sich dokumentierende Anerkennung der gesamten Christenheit präzisiert.… Seinem Apostolat fehlt die nachprüfbare Eindeutigkeit. Seine Autorität ist nicht »legitim«. Sie ist es insofern nicht, als ihr die Verbindung zu der Autorität der Urapostel und der Urgemeinde fehlt und insofern auch die Beziehung zu dem Jesus, der diese gesetzt und entsandt hat.46

As seen in this citation, according to Käsemann, Paul has no legitimacy in the eyes of his opponents. Their apostleship is set in place by Jesus and confirmed through demonstrable signs, proving the authenticity of their call.47 These signs 44 Ernst Käsemann, Die Legitimität des Apostels: Eine Untersuchung zu 2 Korinther 10– 13 (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1956), 9. 45 Ibid., 9–10. 46 Ibid., 33–34. 47 Similarly, Udo Schnelle, “Der 2. Korintherbrief und die Mission gegen Paulus” in Der Zweite Korintherbrief: Literarische Gestalt - historische Situation - theologische Argumentation. Festschrift zum 70. Geburtstag von Dietrich-Alex Koch, ed. Dieter Sänger,

12

Chapter 1: Introduction

show that they continue the mission of Jesus, whom they knew personally. With these credentials Paul cannot compete. Consequently, he dismisses ecstatic experiences as legitimate criteria for ministry. While they may have importance personally, they do not provide valid qualifications for apostleship.48 Moreover, Käsemann contends that the ascent reveals that ecstatic experiences do not create the marks of apostleship and are irrelevant for ministry. Instead, the pertinent characteristics for apostleship are those that mark service to the Christian community: ὑποµονή, ἀσθένεια, σωφρονεῖν, and ἀγάπη.49 The dichotomy that Käsemann creates between what is useful for the community (weakness and love) and what is not (ecstatic experiences) remains influential. Additionally, his proposal that the ascent really highlights Paul’s suffering rather than ecstatic power continues to resonate with many interpreters. Käsemann, like the previous scholars, also relates the ascent to Paul’s opponents. But instead of the ascent “trumping” his rivals, he claims that Paul shares the experience to show that these encounters really mean nothing at all for his ministry and, therefore, are unimportant for the Christian congregation. Correspondingly, they hold no value for true apostolic identity. Käsemann’s insight that the ascent highlights Paul’s weakness is an important one. Yet his views that Paul shares this experience merely in response to his opponents and that he uses it to underscore its uselessness to ministry, and by extension, to the community are insufficient. As will be shown in the following discussion, Paul includes this account because it has great import for the current Corinthian situation. It is a significant encounter because it illustrates the larger cosmic conflict taking place around the knowledge of God and demonstrates humanity’s vulnerable role in this contest. Käsemann’s claim that the ascent is an experience that only has personal, not communal, value, can be called into question. The fact that Paul shares the event with the Corinthian congregation in a letter that will be read publicly undermines the idea that this experience only has personal significance for

FRLANT 250 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2012), who writes, “Die Fremdmissionare legten zwar Wert auf ihre jüdische Herkunft (vgl. 2Kor 11,22), das entscheidende Kriterium ihrer Glaubwürdigkeit war jedoch der sich in Zeichen und Wundern artikulierende Geistbesitz (vgl. 2Kor 12,12), sie konnten ekstatische Visionen sowie Zeichen und Wunder vorweisen (vgl. 2Kor 11,6; 12,1.12). Wahrscheinlich vertraten die Fremdmissionare eine Herrlichkeitschristologie, indem sie den Glanz und die Herrlichkeit des Auferstandenen rühmten und ihre Anteilhabe an dieser Herrlichkeit öffentlich zur Schau stellten” (317). 48 Käsemann, Die Legitimität des Apostels, 64–65. Käsemann writes, “daß hier gerade der Verzicht auf jede enthusiastische Begründung des Apostolates ausgesprochen wird, daß Paulus seine ekstatischen Erlebnisse für seine ganz persönliche Angelegenheit ansieht und sich gegen ihre organische Verknüpfung mit seinem Amte aufs entschiedenste wehrt” (65; emphasis mine). See also 30–33; 38; 63–66. 49 Ibid., 66.

1.3 Paul’s Himmelsreise in Recent Interpretations

13

Paul. Moreover, according to 1 Corinthians, both Paul and the Corinthian congregation were used to public ecstatic displays (1 Corinthians 12:7–11, 28–30; 14:3–6, 22–29). Thus, the idea that ecstatic experiences were only of personal importance to the Corinthians is unlikely. Furthermore, the dichotomy that Käsemann creates between what is important for the community (service through love and weakness) and what is not important (ecstatic experiences) is a false one. Indeed, in Paul’s view both ecstatic experiences and service through love and weakness benefit the community, for Paul himself brings these dimensions together. Hans Dieter Betz, in his monograph Der Apostel Paulus und die Sokratische Tradition: Eine exegetische Untersuchung zu seiner “Apologie” 2 Korinther 10–1350 and in his seminal 1969 article “Eine Christus-Aretalogie bei Paulus (2 Kor 12,7–10),”51 argues that both Paul’s ascent and his subsequent request to the Lord are parodies of their respective genres. Paul’s ascent parodies the heavenly rapture genre as indicated by his use of the third person as well as his inability to relate what he heard.52 In addition, Paul’s request for the removal of the thorn parallels the style of an aretalogy in which the afflicted asks the gods for a cure. Betz writes, Formgeschichtlich gesehen haben wir in V. 7–10 ein »Heilungswunder« vor uns, das im Stile einer Aretalogie vorgetragen ist. Innerhalb der sog. »Narrenrede« kann eine solche Aretalogie nur als Parodie angesprochen werden. Obwohl die religiöse Parodie noch wenig erforscht ist, läßt sich der Schluß nicht umgehen, daß sich Paulus auch hier in gängigen literarischen Formen bewegt.53

Using a form-critical point of view, Betz claims that Paul employs popular literary styles. In this quote, since Paul is engaged in a fool’s speech, Betz concludes that the apostle must be utilizing parody when he describes his request for a healing in the style of an aretalogy. In the rest of the article, Betz provides texts which he contends correspond to Paul’s speech to the Lord.54 That Paul parodies the form of a healing cure found in aretalogies is apparent in the Lord’s refusal to heal the apostle. As several scholars note, not all of Betz’s argument is equally convincing. 55 However, one of his basic conclusions continues to appear throughout subsequent scholarship on this passage: Paul re-

50 Hans Dieter Betz, Der Apostel Paulus und die Sokratische Tradition: Eine exegetische Untersuchung zu seiner “Apologie” 2 Korinther 10–13, BHT 45 (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1972). 51 Hans Dieter Betz, “Eine Christus-Aretalogie bei Paulus (2 Kor 12,7–10),” ZTK 66 (1969): 288–305. 52 Betz, Der Apostel Paulus, see esp. 84, 89, 92. 53 Betz, “Eine Christus-Aretalogie,” 289. 54 Ibid., e.g., 290–292. 55 Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 827–828; Bernhard Heininger, Paulus als Visionär: Eine religionsgeschichtliche Studie, HBS 9 (Freiburg: Herder, 1996), 256–257.

14

Chapter 1: Introduction

counts this event in a way that shows its uselessness. This influential perspective, appearing succinctly in a lecture given at the Graduate Theological Union and the University of California Berkley, is worth quoting at length: What one is likely to hear in heaven is the “unspeakable words” of heavenly revelation. Instead of telling the Corinthians what they were, Paul refers to the other meaning, according to which he is not allowed to reveal esoteric revelation. Thus, the whole ascension was “useless,” as he had announced in 12:1, in terms of the requirements of the opponents. The second parody is a parody of a “healing miracle” which, however, does not produce the result it is supposed to produce. It is also “useless” because Paul does not get healed…. He went through all the motions of an ascension report but he did not have anything to bring back to them. Similarly, he experienced a “healing miracle” without getting healed. In all of this Paul imitates very closely the literary forms and concepts of his opponents.56

For Betz, since Paul cannot tell what he heard and does not receive healing, he provides the Corinthians with parodies in his narrative to indicate the worthless nature of these supernatural events. Significant for Betz is that Paul responds to his opponents in offering this experience. He posits that Paul only shares this account because of the false apostles’ demand: “Der Abschnitt V.7–10 gehört dem Kontext nach in den Zusammenhang von V. 1–10, in dem sich Paulus auf Verlangen seiner Gegner mit dem Thema der Visionen und Offenbarungen (ὀπτασίας καὶ ἀποκαλύψεις) befaßt.”57 This excerpt illustrates that for Betz, Paul’s ascent narrative only appears as a response to his rivals. In Betz’s view, Paul’s challengers were Jewish Christian missionaries who held to a “divine-man” religious perspective. 58 The “divine-man” works miracles and mediates God’s power. As he observes, Der legitime Apostel ist für sie θεῖος ἀνήρ; seine Funktion wird analog den von uns herangezogenen Heilungswundern zu beschreiben sein: Im Rahmen des Christuskultes wirkt er als Repräsentant des Christus, der ihn direkt einsetzt oder bestätigt und dessen »Kraft« in seiner Mittlertätigkeit als Wundertäter, Prophet und Aretaloge epiphan wird.59

For those who oppose Paul, the divine-man concept carries heavy weight for they have a certain image of what a divine-man is and does. Yet when Paul goes on his heavenly journey but cannot divulge what he hears, and prays for healing but does not receive it, he undermines this notion as well as the importance of these supernatural phenomena. In turn, he undercuts his opponents who place such an emphasis on these experiences. In addition to these views, Betz also asserts that the phrase ἄγγελος σατανᾶ (12:7) originates with Paul’s

56

Betz, Paul’s Apology, II Corinthians 10–13, and the Socratic Tradition, 10. Betz, “Eine Christus-Aretalogie,” 288. 58 Here he follows Dieter Georgi, The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians: A Study of Religious Propaganda, SNTW (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1986). 59 Betz, “Eine Christus-Aretalogie,” 304. 57

1.3 Paul’s Himmelsreise in Recent Interpretations

15

opponents and that with this phrase they accent Paul’s inferior status: Paul is not a divine-man because he is under the power of an angel of Satan.60 Betz’s view, like those of all the previous interpreters, has much to commend it. He examines the broader context of the letter and places Paul in conversation with other texts roughly contemporaneous with the apostle. Yet contrary to his argument, the passage does not suggest that the phrase “angel of Satan” originates with the opponents.61 In addition, the fact that Paul is not able to divulge what he hears does not necessarily indicate irony or parody. As will be seen in the ensuing discussion, ἄρρητα (12:4) appears in several places with reference to the secret things of God. Furthermore, Paul’s narration of his ascent takes place in between two peristasis catalogs (11:23–33; 12:10), which are not parodies.62 The apostle shares the ascent and the occurrence of the thorn in the flesh not in the interest of parody but rather to illustrate another example of his weakness in which he faces severe opposition. In a similar vein, God’s refusal to remove the thorn does not necessarily indicate parody or irony. On the reading presented here, Paul relates the Lord’s answer to show that God is present even in the midst of evil and satanic assault and that God promises divine presence and power in the face of such attack. Additionally, the specific date and Paul’s indecisiveness concerning whether the experience took place in or outside of the body points to the apostle’s genuine experience and does not suggest a parody.63 Finally, as Margaret Thrall insightfully observes, the apostle’s utilization of Christ’s name in the story highlights the unlikelihood that this report is a parody. She notes: Paul has begun by indicating that he will speak about visions and revelations that come from the Lord, i.e., Christ, or, indeed, have ‘the Lord’ as their content. He then describes the subject of the rapture as ‘a man in Christ.’ Whilst this may simply mean ‘a Christian,’ it is still a theologically significant way of referring to an adherent of the Christian movement: the use of Christ’s name in this context is unlikely to have become a mere convention, unthinkingly used. And in the second narrative Christ is himself the central figure. All these allusions to Christ must surely be intended seriously. Is it at all probable that Paul would refer to Christ in the satirical fashion which the parody theory would demand – with the intention, that is, to evoke laughter?64

60

Ibid., 290–291. See my discussion of this phrase in 3.2.3 and 3.2.3.1. See also James Buchanan Wallace, Snatched into Paradise (2 Cor 12:1–10): Paul’s Heavenly Journey in the Context of Early Christian Experience (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2011), 275. 62 For a discussion of interpreters who believe the peristasis catalogs are parodies consult Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:755–758. Thrall is rightly cautious in viewing them as such. 63 So also Paula Gooder, Only the Third Heaven?: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10 and Heavenly Ascent (London: T&T Clark, 2007), 194–195. 64 Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:777. 61

16

Chapter 1: Introduction

Thrall’s insight that the Lord plays an important role in Paul’s experience underscores the improbability that the apostle engages in parody here.65 Betz, like all of the interpreters presented above, views these verses primarily through the lens of a defense. The reading argued for in the ensuing discussion is that these verses consist of more than a defense. Paul relates an experience that mirrors that of the Corinthian congregation and demonstrates the existence of a greater conflict around knowledge of God into which they and, indeed, all of humanity are caught up. 1.3.5 Lincoln and Tabor The aforementioned interpretations arise out of a number of fundamental assumptions about this visionary voyage: (1) it has no real value to Paul’s overall theological argument; (2) it is not really significant to anyone other than Paul, if even to him!; and (3) it is only disclosed because of Paul’s desire to refute his opponents. In one interpretation, the opponents boast about their own visions and Paul feels forced to relate his own experience in return. In another, they are not boasting, but Paul tells of his heavenly rapture to stress his superiority. Finally, in Käsemann’s case, Paul reports the event to defend his apostolic legitimacy against those who would oppose his authority. The ascent reveals that ecstatic experiences do not confirm legitimate apostolic authority and have no communal benefit. All of these interpretations have in common the assumption that Paul relates the visionary experience of chapter 12 to defend himself against the rival missionaries.66 While the subsequent discussion of 2 Corinthians 12:1–10 will address various aspects of these interpretations, it is important to note at the outset that Andrew Lincoln and James Tabor argue against the view that this event is insignificant to Paul and to the Corinthians. Andrew Lincoln’s work Paradise Now and Not Yet: Studies in the Role of the Heavenly Dimension in Paul’s Thought with Special References to His Eschatology examines the otherworldly dimension of Paul’s thought and the language Paul uses to describe this realm. In fact, Lincoln insists that Paul’s experience in chapter 12 is not unique for Paul and that his references to visions and revelations in the plural (12:1) indicate that the apostle probably originally intended to speak about

65 See also Garland, 2 Corinthians, 511; Frank Matera, II Corinthians (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2003), 275–276. 66 As Helmut Saake (“Paulus als Ekstatiker: Pneumatologische Beobachtungen zu 2 Kor. 12:1–10,” NovT 15 [1973]: 153–160) writes, “Daß der Apostel überhaupt auf seine ekstatischen Erfahrungen zu sprechen kommt, beruht auf dem Zwang, seinen Apostolat widersinnigerweise in grotesker Analogie zu den einzelnen Punkten des Selbstruhmes seiner Gegner in Korinth, den unverständigen Gefährdeten gegenüber plausibel, verteidigen zu müssen” (153).

1.3 Paul’s Himmelsreise in Recent Interpretations

17

many of these types of encounters.67 Lincoln maintains that just because “Paul does not anywhere dwell on this side of Christian existence must not be taken to mean that it was not a valid side or that it only played a very minor part on the periphery of his life.”68 He argues that lack of frequent reference does not necessarily mean a lack of frequent experience. 69 In addition, he views this event as evidence of Spirit manifestations which were prevalent in the early church as narrated in Acts and in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians.70 Lincoln’s monograph concentrates mainly on Pauline passages which contain the term οὔρανος or an equivalent, which means that in his work “topics such as angels or principalities and powers which would have to be given fuller treatment in any comprehensive discussion of the heavenly dimension are mentioned in passing.” 71 The subsequent exploration addresses this lacuna by taking up Lincoln’s affirmation of the significance of angels and powers to Paul’s thought. Such superhuman beings are integral to Paul’s argument in these chapters; they are central actors in his depiction of a cosmic contest.72 With Lincoln, James Tabor refutes the view that Paul disparages revelations or visions. 73 In fact, he argues that Paul defends his authority as an apostle on the basis of such encounters. Tabor goes on to make another important observation, which is that Paul mentions an ascent to heaven, and not just any pneumatic experience, in his defense of his apostleship. For Paul, the experience of the ascent to Paradise was so important that he used it to confirm his authority as an apostle.74 Moreover, Tabor believes that this experience correlates closely to the core of Paul’s message, which is Paul’s expectation of the glorification 67

Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet, 72. Ibid. 69 Ibid. 70 Ibid., 85–86. 71 Ibid., 6. 72 Tabor, Things Unutterable, also recognizes that “the language Paul uses for the heavenly world indicates that his cosmos is a vast one, populated with multiple levels of angelic beings. In Rom. 8:38–39 he mentions aggeloi, archai, dunameis, hupsoma, and bathos – which seem to be various powers below the level of God’s throne (v. 34), all subjugated through the power of Christ” (119). 73 Tabor, Things Unutterable, 33–34; Christopher R. A. Morray-Jones, “Paradise Revisited (2 Cor 12:1–12): The Jewish Mystical Background of Paul’s Apostolate” HTR 86 [1993]: 265–292) concurs, stating that “The visionary ascent to heaven of which Paul is driven to boast seems, then, to be of crucial importance to his claim to apostolic authority and power” (277). See also Saake who says, “Daß Paulus eine exakte Zeitangabe vorzulegen vermag, deutet – auf ihn selbst gewendet – an, wie genau er sich Rechenschaft über seine pneumatischen Erlebnisse gab und wie hoch er sie schätzte: periphere Belanglosigkeiten wären derweil längst vergessen” (“Paulus als Ekstatiker,” 154). Interestingly, although Saake believes that Paul uses the experience to defend himself against the false apostles, he does see the experience as one which Paul does not dismiss. It is significant to Paul’s life and apostleship and not just for him personally. 74 Tabor, Things Unutterable, 37–38. 68

18

Chapter 1: Introduction

of the sons of God.75 Paul’s ascent functions primarily as a foretaste or anticipation of a final or permanent ascent. He contends, “What the seer beholds and even experiences in some cases, mirrors what is expected at the end (whether end of life, history or whatever).”76 Similar to Schmithals, Tabor understands Paul’s encounter as a proleptic one.77 Most importantly, Tabor views heavenly glorification as the center of Paul’s message and relatedly, he advocates for a cosmic view of salvation. He writes, “Paul’s understanding of salvation involves a rather astounding (at least to modern ears) scheme of ‘mass apotheosis’ and imminent cosmic takeover.”78 Therefore, for Tabor, Paul’s ascent presents a Hellenistic way of salvation, an apotheosis or immortalization with a certain apocalyptic peculiarity linked to Paul’s desire to escape mortality.79 Although the glorification has already begun through God’s Spirit, the final glorification will take place in the future.80 Like both Tabor and Lincoln, this study concludes that Paul does not belittle his ascent, although this conclusion is reached by different reasoning. Paul’s inclusion of this account, the language he uses to describe it, and the wider context of the letter suggest that he does not denigrate these types of experiences but utilizes this event to illustrate to the Corinthians an important part of his argument, which takes on a distinctive tone in chapter 10 but whose themes echo earlier parts of the letter (2:11; 4:4; 6:14–15; cf. 1 Corinthians 2:8; 5:5; 10:21). Paul inserts his ascent report because it connects with his understanding of humanity’s predicament in the cosmos and God’s response to this predicament. Ultimately this account reflects the cosmic contest between God and Satan, a contest that involves and affects humanity. 75

Ibid., see especially 19–45. Ibid., 81. 77 In viewing ascents as a foretaste of the soul’s ultimate journey, Schmithals and Tabor follow Wilhelm Bousset (“Die Himmelsreise der Seele,” AR 4 [1901]: 136–169, 229–273) who proposes this view and also maintains that ascents are a means of encouragement to the faithful. Even in this life being in the presence of God is a possibility. He writes, “Und zwar handelt es sich um eine doppelte Reihe von Vorstellungen, einmal um eine eigentlich eschatologische Gedankenreihe, nämlich um die Lehre, dass die Seele nach ihrer Loslösung vom Leibe durch den Tod die Himmelsregionen durchwandert, um vor den Thron Gottes zu gelangen, zweitens aber auch um eine mystisch ekstatische Lehre, dass dem Gläubigen und Frommen der Aufstieg zum höchsten Gott schon in diesem Leben möglich sei, und eine daran sich anschliessende bestimmte Praxis der Ekstase. Beide Vorstellungsreihen sind eng mit einander verbunden. Die Ekstase, vermöge deren man sich durch den Himmel zum höchsten Gott erhebt, ist ja nichts anderes als eine Anticipation der Himmelsreise der Seele nach dem Tode des Menschen” (136). Along with Schmithals and Tabor, other interpreters who follow this trajectory include Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet, 80 and Wallace, Snatched into Paradise, 29. 78 Tabor, Things Unutterable, 9. 79 Ibid., 45, 95, 124. 80 Ibid., 14. 76

1.3 Paul’s Himmelsreise in Recent Interpretations

19

Both Lincoln and Tabor interpret Paul’s ascent in terms of the broader framework of apostolic authority. In Lincoln’s case, Paul utilizes this experience to show that it “is not such experiences on which he relies for evidence of his apostleship,”81 whereas for Tabor the episode serves to “confirm his selfunderstanding of his authority as an apostle.”82 Whether positively or negatively, both Tabor and Lincoln relate Paul’s inclusion of the experience to his defense of his apostleship. However, this framework is too narrow given the cosmic scope with which Paul begins chapter 10. Paul’s concern ranges more broadly than apostleship. He perceives a cosmic conflict taking place around divine knowledge, and his ascent points to the reality of this conflict. 1.3.6 Gooder and Wallace In her monograph, Only to the Third Heaven?: 2 Corinthians 12.1–10 and Heavenly Ascent, Paula Gooder offers a unique interpretation of Paul’s Himmelsreise. She argues that compared to other ascent texts Paul depicts his heavenly journey in an unusual way. Since the apostle neglects some features and modifies others, he demonstrates a “critical relationship” with the ascent tradition. 83 For her, in light of this larger context, the apostle’s experience makes more sense if it is understood as a failed ascent rather than a successful one. It then becomes another example of Paul’s weakness. 84 Accordingly, Paul relates the event, not in response to his opponents’ boast of visions and revelations, but as another instance in his catalog of weaknesses.85 However, at the same time, Gooder believes that the ascent remains important to Paul’s idea of apostleship. 86 The satanic angel prevents Paul from reaching the highest heaven, and this is the weakness to which the apostle refers when he relates this ascent.87 Thus, the thorn in the flesh and the angel of Satan represent opposition within the heavenly spheres.88 In her view, such a reading coheres with chapters 10–13 in which Paul boasts primarily of weakness. Since the theme of weakness permeates the context of the ascent, Paul could not have had a

81

Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet, 77. In this regard Lincoln aligns with Käsemann’s

view. 82

Tabor, Things Unutterable, 34. Gooder, Only to the Third Heaven?, 20. 84 Ibid. 85 Ibid., 167. 86 Ibid., 210–211. 87 Ibid., 190, 197–203. 88 Ibid., 200. This view of opposition, which I also hold, corresponds to that of Price, “Punished in Paradise,” and Morray-Jones, “Paradise Revisited.” Yet the idea of satanic opposition to the soul’s journey was anticipated as early as Bousset, “Der Himmelsreise,” 144– 148. Cf. Gershom G. Scholem, Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism (Jerusalem: Schocken, 1941). 83

20

Chapter 1: Introduction

successful trip to the highest heaven because such an occurrence would indicate that Paul is undercutting his own argument. If he narrates a successful ascent, he boasts of power and not weakness.89 The thesis presented here aligns with several features of Gooder’s argument: viewing opposition as a major motif in Paul’s ascent, seeing the satanic angel as attempting to obstruct Paul’s journey, and understanding the episode as one which underscores Paul’s weakness. However, her insightful reading misses several critical elements in regard to Paul’s heavenly voyage. The apostle asserts that he has visions and revelations of the Lord (κυρίου; 12:1). More than likely, the genitive here is both subjective and objective.90 Moreover, he has heard ἄρρητα ῥήµατα (12:4). This language suggests that Paul has both seen the Lord and received a divine revelation. Such a depiction indicates success, not failure. Furthermore, Paul characterizes the revelations he receives as extraordinary, which also points to a successful experience (12:7). Indeed, Gooder notes this possibility but states that if her reading is correct, then what is important about the event is the significance Paul places on the episode. Paul views it as an indication of his weakness and demonstrates weakness by divulging it. Thus, for her the weakness includes both that it is a failed ascent and that Paul chooses nonetheless to speak about it.91 Yet Gooder does not take into account that one can posit the ascent as an example of weakness without deeming it a failure. A successful ascent does not mean that Paul boasts of his own power and ability, even though this is what she argues. 92 At the beginning of the narrative, Paul attributes the ascent to God’s initiative by using the passive of ἁρπάζω to speak of his being taken away to the third heaven, thereby implying that God is the agent. Thus, a successful ascent is not about Paul but about God. This study proposes that the weakness the event highlights is the inability of the apostle to deal on his own with the satanic attack. Additionally, the unusual way Paul depicts his ascent does not suggest a failed journey; rather, the apostle focuses on the elements of the trip which correspond to the Corinthian situation. Moreover, although Gooder is correct in seeing the theme of opposition as an important motif, she does not connect this theme to the military imagery in chapters 10–13. This study will demonstrate that the opposition Paul experiences in his ascent correlates with the martial imagery in these chapters and with the opposition he believes is taking place in the Corinthian congregation. Thus, the ascent points to the need for divine intervention and assistance when facing satanic obstruction. 89

Ibid., 203–211. So also Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet, 73; Matera, II Corinthians, 277; Martin, 2 Corinthians, 397; Heininger, Paulus als Visionär, 246. 91 Gooder, Only to the Third Heaven?, 207. 92 Ibid., 2, 203. 90

1.3 Paul’s Himmelsreise in Recent Interpretations

21

In contrast to the preceding views, James Buchanan Wallace in his monograph Snatched into Paradise (2 Cor 12:1–10): Paul’s Heavenly Journey in the Context of Early Christian Experience asserts that “Paul’s argument is not just about his identity as an apostle or his theology of ministry; the letter is also an attempt to persuade the Corinthian community to adopt a certain character that will yield particular actions.”93 Thus, Wallace rightfully refuses to relegate Paul’s ascent to a matter of his apostleship alone. Instead, Paul’s encounter emphasizes the types of experiences taking place in his communities and the kind of supernatural occurrences the apostle expects all Christians to undergo.94 Wallace asserts that Paul’s ascent is significant for the Corinthians because it forms their expectations and shapes their religious practices. It also illustrates how such experiences should be approached. 95 Ultimately, 2 Corinthians 12:1– 4 provides “a window into the religious experiences of Paul and his communities.”96 According to Wallace, part of the importance of Paul’s experience is that it highlights the types of events taking place in early Christian congregations and allows one to see the language used to describe such episodes. His comments correctly challenge the prevailing views about Paul’s ascent as a denigration of these experiences or as a merely personal experience that Paul’s opponents force him to share. He writes, Thus, even when Paul defends his own character, the construction of his character is not without significance for the Corinthians themselves. We risk obscuring the significance of the heavenly ascent when we regard it as a personal experience which Paul shares only to best his opponents.97

This excerpt demonstrates that although Wallace does not follow Lincoln and Tabor in relating Paul’s heavenly journey solely to his apostolic identity, he does agree with their view of the ascent as significant. Moreover, he insightfully observes that Paul never states that his opponents have visions or revelations, or that through his narrated ascent he is responding to their claims of such experiences. From Wallace’s perspective, the opponents whom many commentators assume Paul addresses in his ascent narrative are hypothetical constructs. These scholarly configurations provide a “tenuous” background for reading the ascent episode, much less all of chapters 10–13. 98 Instead, he contends that the deliberative elements in the letter indicate that Paul provides this account, not to 93

Wallace, Snatched into Paradise, 23. Ibid., 37, 167. 95 Ibid., 29, 36, 167. 96 Ibid., 36. 97 Ibid., 23. 98 Ibid., 22. See also the important discussion by Jerry Sumney regarding historical reconstructions of Paul’s opponents in “The Role of Historical Reconstructions of Early Christianity in Identifying Paul’s Opponents” PRS 16 (1989): 45–53. 94

22

Chapter 1: Introduction

trump his opponents or to denigrate these experiences, but as a “model to be imitated.”99 For him the passage persuades the Corinthians to take specific actions such as living lives of humility and completing their contribution to the Jerusalem Collection. 100 He maintains that Paul also expected all Christians to experience divine power and to allow this divine power to transform them in such a way that their former “pre-conversion” selves would no longer exist.101 Although Wallace does not go so far as to say that Paul expects all Christians to experience journeys to heaven, he does maintain that the apostle’s ascent “resembles experiences he expects all Christians to have.” 102 Paul’s heavenly rapture corresponds with the types of divine encounters happening in his congregations. In his argument that Paul’s ascent presents a model to be imitated, Wallace refers to several elements of the event that warrant imitation. First, the apostle calls the Corinthians to humility. He had been tempted to be prideful due to his extraordinary revelations, and as a result, he received an angel of Satan to disabuse him of any notions of pride. Similarly, the Corinthians have experienced different spiritual gifts and encounters with divine power, so they too run the risk of being arrogant.103 Paul’s rivals, who are also Satan’s representatives, may serve to humiliate them as Satan’s angel humiliated him.104 In addition, Paul’s depiction of his future visit may also serve as a humiliating and humbling encounter for the Corinthians.105 For Wallace, the Corinthians may receive humility in two ways, either by Paul or by the false apostles. He writes, “What Paul had to go through himself in order to learn not to be exalted, the Corinthians may likewise have to undergo, whether through the rivals or at the hands of Paul himself.”106 Consequently, humility is one of the primary elements in the ascent account to imitate. According to Wallace, the second and third elements worthy of imitation in the ascent narrative are self-giving and weakness. As one can see, these features are closely related to the theme of humility. Just as Christ relinquished equality with God in order to become incarnate, Paul gives up a boast of a dramatic encounter, choosing instead to boast in weakness. Wallace asserts, “But just as Christ took on the form of a servant (Phil 2:7), Paul boasts in the suffering and weakness he has endured as a servant.… By boasting in weaknesses, Paul is yet again taking on the humility and weakness of Christ.” 107 The 99

Ibid., 29. Ibid. 101 Ibid., 170–171. 102 Ibid., 167 (emphasis his). 103 Ibid., 283. 104 Ibid., 284. 105 Ibid., 283–284. 106 Ibid., 284. See also 231. 107 Ibid., 282. 100

1.3 Paul’s Himmelsreise in Recent Interpretations

23

ascent highlights humility, weakness, and self-giving as attributes the Corinthians should embrace. Wallace then connects all of these characteristics to the Corinthians’ contribution to the collection. As Paul learned that he could only be perfected through weakness and service, likewise the Corinthians can experience completion when they continue what they have begun. Wallace notes that Paul uses verbs with the root τελ- in 2 Corinthians 8:6, 11 and 12:9.108 When the Corinthians complete their responsibility to the collection, they can be brought to perfection, for their participation indicates that they follow Paul and Christ in living a life of “self-giving weakness.”109 Wallace’s assertion that this passage is about more than a defense of apostolic authority is noteworthy. More than likely, Paul’s experience reflects the types of supernatural encounters taking place among his congregations. That Paul’s ascent is significant to him and the Corinthian congregation is an important part of Wallace’s argument and the claim presented in this project, yet the reasons for assigning value to this episode differ between the two studies. For Wallace, humility is one of the primary traits Paul’s ascent calls the Corinthians to imitate, which makes this event important for Paul’s audience. He contends that Paul’s rivals may serve to humiliate the Corinthians and be the instrument to make them humble. However, when Paul refers to these agents, he does not mention producing humility as one of their functions. Instead, he asserts that they deceive (11:13), preach another Jesus, and proffer a different gospel (11:4). His language suggests the dangerous nature of their mission, which is to mislead the Corinthians. From Paul’s perspective, their mission is harmful, not beneficial. Wallace also posits that during his next visit Paul may humble the Corinthians just as the angel of Satan humbled him. Yet when Paul mentions his future return to Corinth, he does not speak about his humbling them. Rather, he declares that it is he who may be humbled by God (12:21). Moreover, to propose that Paul takes on the role of the angel of Satan and performs this function for his congregation is to align the apostle with an entity he perceives and depicts as an enemy (11:3, 13–15; cf. 2:11; 4:4; 6:15). Wallace’s contention that Paul’s experience holds value for him and for the Corinthians is extremely significant. While he sees the event as important because it presents a model to be imitated, I posit that Paul’s ascent is notable because it reflects the larger cosmic contest around the knowledge of God and provides an opportunity for the apostle to connect his own story with that of his audience’s present experience. Just as the Corinthians face the advent of satanic emissaries in their midst who seek to deceive them and ultimately lead them away from the knowledge of God, Paul likewise faces a satanic adversary

108 109

Ibid., 284. Ibid., 285. See also 231.

24

Chapter 1: Introduction

who attempts to hinder his reception of revelations. What connects Paul’s ascent to the Corinthian situation is not the need for humility but the presence of satanic opposition. Consequently, Paul’s ascent account becomes “testimony” to the Corinthians concerning spiritual warfare and divine assistance. That Paul begins this section of the letter with martial imagery suggests that he perceives the Corinthian situation through a lens of conflict. Rather than a model to be imitated, the ascent is an experience from his life that reveals the greater conflict that stands behind the present struggle in Corinth.

1.4 An Epigrammatic Survey of Early Christian Interpreters 1.4 An Epigrammatic Survey of Early Christian Interpreters

1.4.1 Paul’s Ascent in the Writings of the Church Fathers The interpretive trajectory proposed by this project coheres in several respects with some of the earliest commentators on the apostle Paul. Many of the church fathers do not adhere to an interpretation in which the apostle belittles this event, a move which, as discussed above, some modern scholars make. On the contrary, for these early exegetes, Paul’s ascent is real and points to a supernatural encounter with the divine. The following discussion is not exhaustive but provides a snapshot of Paul’s ascent among these writers as well as offers a quick glimpse into their cosmological outlook in which spiritual beings oppose God and humanity, including believers. According to some of these authors, Paul’s journey signifies the distance between the human and the divine and the importance of revelations. For Clement of Alexandria and Saint Ambrose, Paul’s encounter denotes the ineffability of God. Clement asserts that, when the apostle states ἤκουσεν ἄρρητα ῥήµατα ἅ οὐκ ἐξὸν ἀνθρώπῳ λαλῆσαι, he is not expressing a fear of disobeying God’s command but rather declaring the inability of human beings to describe the divine. Interestingly, Clement includes Paul’s language in 2 Corinthians 12 in the same discussion with Plato’s and Orpheus’s views of human inexpressibility regarding God.110 Paul’s ascent is another example of the limitation of humans in discussing the divine realm.111 Implicit in Clement’s citation is the event’s significance. Similarly, Ambrose utilizes the apostle’s ascent as an example of the incapacity to explain the Son’s generation. He states, “For if Paul 110

Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies 5.12 (ANF 2:462–463). Gregory of Nazianzus (The Second Theological Oration 20 [NPNF2 295]) also connects Paul’s journey to the topic of God’s nature. He writes, “If it had been permitted to Paul to utter what the Third Heaven contained, and his own advance, or ascension, or assumption to that place, perhaps we should know something more about God’s nature, if this was the mystery of the rapture. But since it was ineffable, we too will honor it by silence. Thus much we will hear Paul say about it, that we know in part and we prophesy in part (modified translation).” 111

1.4 An Epigrammatic Survey of Early Christian Interpreters

25

says that the words which he heard when caught up into the third heaven might not be uttered, how can we explain the secret of this generation from and of the Father, which we can neither hear nor attain to with our understanding?”112 The apostle’s journey becomes an illustration of one’s incapability to speak of divine matters. Dionysius of Alexandria and Tertullian also assume the importance of Paul’s rapture. In his discussion of the similarities and dissimilarities between the books of Revelation, the Gospel of John, and 1 John, Dionysius quickly mentions Paul’s ascent and grants that Paul did receive revelations in this journey although he did not include them in his epistles.113 In his refutation of heretical thought, Tertullian also cites Paul’s ascent as evidence for his argument.114 Although Paul was caught up to the third heaven and heard ἄρρητα ῥήµατα, the apostle did not teach another secret doctrine known only to a few or a different doctrine from what the other apostles such as Peter proclaimed. Tertullian does not want to set the apostles against one another and decries the heretics in their practice of doing so. 115 Underlying Tertullian’s reference to Paul’s heavenly journey is the assumption of the importance of the apostle’s experience and his recognition that although the apostle does hear unutterable words, he does not receive a secret gospel which he subsequently shares with a few. Gregory of Nazianzus refers to the ascent in a list of the apostle’s attributes. Gregory speaks at length of Paul’s labors, sufferings, hardships, and care for his congregations. Near the end of his enumeration of the apostle’s characteristics, he states, He lived not to himself, but to Christ and his preaching. He crucified the world to himself, and being crucified to the world and the things which are seen, he thought all things little, and too small to be desired; even though from Jerusalem and round about unto Illyricum he had fully preached the Gospel, even though he had been prematurely caught up to the third heaven, and had had a vision of Paradise, and had heard unspeakable words.116

Gregory highlights Paul’s love for his churches and in doing so Gregory recognizes that Paul’s ascent is just as important as his sufferings for the sake of the gospel. For him, ecstatic experiences and suffering go together, providing a thick description of the apostle’s life and work. Hilary of Poiters calls upon Paul and his heavenly journey as support for understanding Isaiah’s prophetic witness to Jesus’s passion. For those who

112

Ambrose, Of the Christian Faith 1.10.65 (NPNF2 10:212). Dionysius of Alexandria, On the Promises as preserved by Eusebius, Church History 7.25. See also 28.3. 114 Tertullian, On Prescription Against Heretics, 24. 115 Ibid. 116 Gregory of Nazianzus, In Defense of His Flight to Pontus 56 (NPNF2 7:217) 113

26

Chapter 1: Introduction

would disagree with reading Isaiah in this way, Hilary declares that Paul himself interprets Isaiah in such a fashion. Who would dare disagree with the apostle of the Gentiles who has gone into the third heaven? Hilary’s rhetorical diatribe against those who would dare do so is worth quoting: Who are you who has mounted up through the successive heavens, knowing not whether you were in the body or out of the body, and can explain more faithfully than the words of the prophet? Who are you who has heard, and may not tell, the ineffable mysteries of the secret things of heaven, and has proclaimed with greater assurance the knowledge granted you by God for revelation? Who are you who has been foreordained to a full share of the Lord’s suffering on the Cross, and first has been caught up to Paradise and drawn nobler teaching from the Scriptures of God than this chosen vessel?117

For Hilary, Paul’s Himmelsreise affirms his authoritative appropriation of the Old Testament, particularly Isaiah and, indeed, legitimates the apostle’s gospel proclamation in general. The ascent serves as a seal, so to speak, upon Paul’s chosen status as an interpreter of scripture and as a herald of the good news. In his Catechetical Lecture XIV, Cyril of Jerusalem contrasts Paul’s experience with Elijah.118 This discussion occurs as part of a comparison between Jesus’s ascension and the translation of Old Testament figures such as Enoch and Elijah. He writes, For if Elijah attained as far as the first heaven, but Paul as far as the third, the latter, therefore, has obtained a more honorable dignity. Be not ashamed of your Apostles; they are not inferior to Moses, nor second to the Prophets; but they are noble among the noble, yes, nobler still. For Elijah truly was taken up into heaven; but Peter has the keys of the kingdom of heaven, having received the words, Whatsoever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Elijah was taken up only to heaven; but Paul both into heaven, and into paradise (for it behoved the disciples of Jesus to receive more manifold grace), and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for man to utter. But Paul came down again from above, not because he was unworthy to abide in the third heaven, but in order that after having enjoyed things above man’s reach, and descended in honour, and having preached Christ, and died for His sake, he might receive also the crown of martyrdom.119

For Cyril the importance of Paul’s journey is primarily threefold. First, it surpasses Elijah’s translation since Paul travels to the third heaven and on to Paradise, which denotes a more gracious event. Second, Paul is privileged compared to other human beings, even compared to the prophets who experienced translation. In fact, his ascent verifies that he is just as honorable as the prophets of old. And third, lest some think that Paul’s return from the third heaven smacks of inferiority to Enoch and Elijah, Cyril maintains that Paul’s descent illustrates his valued place in the economy of the church for his return allows him to die on behalf of Christ. 117

Hilary of Poitiers, On the Trinity 5.32 (NPNF2 9:95; modified translation). Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lecture 14.26. 119 Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lecture 14.26 (NPNF2 7:101; modified translation). Cf. Catechetical Lecture 6.15. 118

1.4 An Epigrammatic Survey of Early Christian Interpreters

27

Although other references could be cited, the above discussion illustrates that for many of the church fathers, Paul’s ascent was not interpreted as an instance of belittling ecstatic events nor as one in which the episode was unimportant to him. For them, his journey signified his chosen status and his esteemed position. The interpreters above do not engage in a detailed exegetical analysis of the passage itself. Instead, they marshal it as evidence for a particular debate, whether it may be opposing those who refuse to interpret the Old Testament christologically (as in the case of Hilary) or arguing against some who say that Paul taught a secret doctrine to a few (as in the case of Tertullian). In any case, the fact that these writers employ Paul’s journey for their disputes or exhortations indicates their belief that the apostle’s mystical encounter was important, real, and revelatory. In addition, Gregory of Nazianzus’ line of reasoning, that mystical experiences and suffering are not antithetical to each other, agrees with the view presented in this project. Paul’s ascent is just as significant as his peristasis catalogs and, as will be argued below, is connected to his hardship lists. Moreover, Paul’s recounting of the episode in a letter with recurring martial imagery demonstrates that the revelations he receives come about through struggle. John Chrysostom and Origen are two other ancient commentators who deserve mention here. In his homily on 2 Corinthians 12:1–10, Chrysostom underscores several significant features of the apostle’s mystical foray. First, he argues that Paul shares this experience out of necessity due to the presence of the false apostles. 120 The false apostles lie about themselves, whereas Paul hides what is true about himself. After all, it has taken him fourteen years to relate this episode. Paul’s reluctance to divulge this experience forms a stark contrast between him who is forced to boast and the false apostles who brag about themselves openly. In addition, Paul speaks about the abundance of revelations, albeit here he relates only one.121 Chrysostom highlights the ironic contrast of the apostle’s statements. He who has received numerous revelations, nevertheless, experiences an inability to explain how he has received them since he states his uncertainty as to whether they took place in the body or out of the body. Paradoxically to the recipient of such great revelations the method of revelation has not been revealed. 122 In his homily on Acts, Chrysostom briefly mentions the content of these revelations as “things that were before the world was made, he [Paul] learned them all.”123 Second, Chrysostom asserts a reason for Paul’s rapture. Paul’s rapture occurs to indicate that he is not inferior to the other apostles who ministered with 120 John Chrysostom, 2 Corinthians Homily 26. As we have seen, some modern scholars adopt this view. Cf. 2 Corinthians Homily 22. 121 Ibid. 122 Ibid. 123 John Chrysostom, Acts Homily 2 (NPNF1 11:11).

28

Chapter 1: Introduction

Jesus.124 As we have seen, this perspective is similar to that of some of the modern interpreters surveyed above. Third, Paul provides two reasons for the thorn in the flesh. In Paul’s eyes, the thorn occurs so that he may not be exalted. Yet in God’s divine economy the thorn appears to demonstrate God’s power.125 Here Chrysostom points out two ways of understanding the thorn – from a human perspective, to eliminate pride, and from a divine perspective, to demonstrate God’s power. Whereas these two views are not mutually exclusive for modern commentators, Chrysostom makes a point to underscore the differences between human and divine understanding. In his homily on 2 Timothy in which he discusses why God permits affliction and sufferings, Chrysostom again addresses the subject. He states, Hear also the blessed Paul, saying, There was given to me a thorn in the flesh, lest I should be exalted above measure. But this, you say, was an expression of humility. Far from it. The thorn was not sent him that he might be humble, nor does he say this only out of humility. There are other causes besides to be assigned for it. Observe therefore how God, accounting for it, says, My grace is sufficient for thee; not ‘that thou mayest not be exalted above measure,’ but what? For my strength is made perfect in weakness. Two ends therefore were answered at once: what was doing was made clearly manifest, and the whole was ascribed to God. For this cause he has said elsewhere, We carry this treasure in earthen vessels; that is, in bodies weak and liable to suffering. Why? That the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us. If our bodies were not subject to infirmity, all would be ascribed to them.126

In this quote, one sees Chrysostom’s emphasis on grace and divine power as the reason for the thorn in the flesh, not the bestowal of humility. The thorn calls attention to the inherent dichotomy between human weakness and the power of God; weak human bodies become the locus of God’s presence.127 And lastly, Chrysostom regards this pericope as illustrating sufferings Christians must undergo for the sake of the gospel. He believes that the amount of grace supplied for endurance of sufferings matches the intensity of the sufferings, and where affliction appears, so also consolation128 and purification.129 Origen, in Περὶ Εὐχῆς, connects Paul’s experience with prayer. He begins the treatise by acknowledging that God through grace and the Spirit makes possible what is impossible to human rationale and mortal nature. To human beings God grants divine knowledge and wisdom, which are impossible for 124

Chrysostom, 2 Corinthians Homily 26. Ibid. 126 John Chrysostom, 2 Timothy Homily 10 (Tweed, LF 12:263–264). 127 Here in the homily on 2 Timothy Chrysostom seems to conceive of the thorn in the flesh as a sickness or an infirmity, whereas in his homily on 2 Corinthians, he maintains that the thorn is persecution, specifically Alexander the Coppersmith, Hymaeneus, and Philetus. But see also his commentary on Psalms 116 and 142. 128 Here Chrysostom connects chapter 12 with chapter 1 of the epistle (1:4–11). 129 Chrysostom, 2 Corinthians Homily 26. 125

1.4 An Epigrammatic Survey of Early Christian Interpreters

29

humans to attain on their own. Origen cites understanding heavenly things as an example of this divine beneficence. He then presents Paul’s journey as an instance in which heavenly secrets were revealed; the apostle did “search out the things that are in the three heavens, since he heard secret words which it was not granted to man to utter.”130 For Origen, Paul becomes a paradigm of human attainment of divine knowledge through the Spirit. After all Paul declares that believers can know the mind of Christ by God’s will. Similarly, later in the same treatise, Origen links Paul’s discussion of the Spirit in Romans 8 with Paul’s ascent.131 The unspeakable groanings with which the Spirit intercedes are related to the secret words which it is not granted a man to speak. Origen’s linking of this divine encounter with the Spirit and with Romans 8 indicates that for him this event imparts divine knowledge and is intricately related to the Spirit’s activity in prayer. What believers experience in Romans 8 through the Spirit’s groanings is not antithetical to a mystical trip to the third heaven. God’s agency is prominent in both types of ecstatic phenomena. In his Exhortation to Martyrdom, Origen declares that those who suffer martyrdom will acquire knowledge greater than what the apostle received in his mystical journey. He writes, If you believe that Paul was caught up to the third heaven and that he was caught up into paradise and heard secret words which it is not granted to man to utter, you must logically conclude that you yourselves will as a matter of course know secrets both more and greater than the ineffable words then revealed to Paul. For he descended from the third heaven, when he had heard them; but you, having heard them, will not descend. You will have taken up your cross and followed Jesus in whom we have a great high priest that hath passed into the heavens.132

According to Origen, a believer can surpass Paul’s experience through death for the sake of Christ. Paul’s heavenly journey provides a way to link revelation, suffering, and the ultimate experience of suffering, death. Death does not mean the end of revelation but the capacity to receive even greater revelations than the apostle. Thus, in a sense, martyred believers attain a status superior to Paul’s. In their discussion of this pericope, these two interpreters raise several themes pertinent to the examination in the following pages. Chrysostom understands the thorn from two different perspectives – human and divine. He does not subscribe to viewing humility as the reason for the thorn, a position which corresponds to the interpretive posture of this work. Moreover, his two perspectives of the σκόλοψ offer a way to think about it from an anthropological as well as a cosmological viewpoint. Although for him these two perspectives

130

Origen, On Prayer, 1 (ACW, 19:15–16). Ibid., 2.3. 132 Origen, Exhortation to Martyrdom, 3.13 (ACW, 19:153–154). 131

30

Chapter 1: Introduction

diverge, this project brings them together through a spiritual warfare lens. Nevertheless, the anthropological and cosmological pattern that appears in Chrysostom’s understanding of 12:7 is helpful. In addition, the weakness of the human body that he underscores aligns with the view of this work that this episode highlights the vulnerable position of the human being in the cosmos. Furthermore, Origen’s connections between the Spirit, knowledge, revelation, and prayer cohere with a major theme of this project.133 For Paul, the spirit world and epistemology are intimately linked. 1.4.2 Cosmological Affinities Between Paul and the Early Church Fathers The Gedankenklima of Paul’s world is also present in the writings of these interpreters of the early church.134 Paul lives and moves in a world in which the suprahuman and the human intermingle and the supernatural and the natural exist in shared space.135 One catches a glimpse of this “shared space” in various places where these writers discuss how humans affect the suprahuman world and vice versa. For example, when Tertullian declares that prayers for the emperor constitute a sacrifice on the emperor’s behalf, he reveals his participation in this understanding of the world. So also we ‘offer sacrifices’ for the safety of the Emperor, but we do so to our God – and his – and we do it in the way that God has ordained, namely by the offering simply of prayers. (For God, being the creator of the whole Universe, is in no need of smells or of blood. That is the fodder of petty demons. We do not merely despise these demons; we subdue them; we put them to daily disgrace; we drive them out of people, as multitudes can testify.) So then our prayers for the safety of the Emperor are all the more real as we offer them to the one who is able to grant them.136

In this quote Tertullian affirms his belief in the reality of demons, demons’ ability to possess humans, and the power believers have to cast them out. Although suprahuman evil entities affect human beings, God empowers believers to deal with them. While Tertullian’s statement that “multitudes can testify” may be seen by some as an exaggeration, it does suggest that Christians were known for the ability to dispel evil spirits even in this time period.

133 For a discussion on this pericope and its relationship to Origen’s idea of spiritual progress see Wallace, Snatched into Paradise, 292–304. 134 I borrow this term from Johannes J. Thierry, “Der Dorn im Fleische (2 Κοr. 12:7–8),” NovT 5 (1962), 305–307. 135 The notion of shared social space derives from Loren T. Stuckenbruck, “Prayers of Deliverance from the Demonic in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Early Jewish Literature,” in The Changing Face of Judaism, Christianity, and Other Greco-Roman Religions in Antiquity, eds. Ian H. Henderson and Gerbern S. Oegema, JSHRZ 2 (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 2006), 163. See fuller discussion of this topic in 1.5.2. 136 Tertullian, To Scapula, 2 (Turnhout and Paris, 228).

1.4 An Epigrammatic Survey of Early Christian Interpreters

31

In another place one finds a similar belief in Christians’ prayers for the emperor to affect demons. Origen writes, Moreover, we who by our prayers destroy all demons which stir up wars, violate oaths, and disturb the peace, are of more help to the emperors than those who seem to be doing the fighting. We who offer prayers with righteousness, together with ascetic practices and exercises which teach us to despise pleasures and not to be led by them, are cooperating in the tasks of the community. Even more do we fight on behalf of the emperor. And though we do not become fellow-soldiers with him, even if he presses for this, yet we are fighting for him and composing a special army of piety through our intercessions to God.137

A number of themes germane to the present discussion occur in this excerpt. First, Origen expresses a belief in demons’ ability to affect human existence such as by instigating wars. Here the “sharing of social space” wreaks dangerous consequences. Second, he articulates, like Tertullian, the belief that Christians’ prayers can affect and mitigate the power of these beings. This belief in the power of prayer regarding the demonic resonates with the earlier phenomenon of an increase in prayers of deliverance during the first century. And third, Origen asserts that through prayers believers become prayer “warriors,” as it were, constituting an army that does not utilize human weapons for efficacy. In his words we hear echoes of Paul’s insistence upon divine weapons, not human weapons. Both Tertullian and Origen portray an understanding in which human and suprahuman beings exist together in the world and in which the actions of each affect the realm of the other.138 In Origen’s On First Principles we catch another glimpse into the basic cosmological framework of many of the church fathers. After delineating several places in the Old and New Testament where Satan appears, and after quoting Paul’s admonishment to “put on the whole armor of God” because believers do not “wrestle against flesh and blood but principalities, powers, rulers of this world’s darkness,” Origen writes, “Through all these instances, therefore, the divine scripture teaches us that there are certain invisible enemies fighting against us, and it tells us that we must be armed to meet them.”139 Later in the exposition Origen discusses the need for God’s assistance in the contest: For human nature by itself alone cannot, I think, maintain the struggle against “angels” and “heights” and “depths” and any “other creature”; but when it has felt the Lord to be present and dwelling within, it will say in confidence of receiving the divine help…. So I think that a man can probably never by himself overcome an opposing power, but only by the use of divine help.140

137

Origen, Against Celsus 8.73 (Chadwick, 229). See also Lactantius, Divine Institutes, especially 14.1ff. 139 Origen, On First Principles 3.2.1 (Butterworth, 213). 140 Ibid., 3.2.5 (219–220). 138

32

Chapter 1: Introduction

In addition to seeing humans as in a contest with spiritual forces and humans as in need of divine help against these powers, Origen also connects these spiritual enemies with knowledge. These powers start “hostile movements by which false knowledge is implanted in men’s minds and souls are led astray while supposing that they have discovered wisdom.”141 Along with the need to guard their hearts against such perils, believers also need and receive divine assistance from God in the form of angels, God’s ministering spirits.142 Humans, then, are not alone in fighting evil beings. The spiritual contest in which humans participate is one that is recognized even in baptism. When speaking of the sacrament of baptism, Cyril of Jerusalem describes the power of the oil with which newly baptized believers are anointed. He maintains that the exorcized oil was a symbol of sharing in the richness of Christ; it is a power that dispels every trace of hostile influence. Just as insufflation by the faithful and invocation of the name of God burns and drives away demons like a fierce flame, so too the invocation of God and prayer give power to the exorcized oil not only to burn up and destroy the vestiges of past sins but also to drive away all the invisible powers of the evil one.143

In Cyril’s words, prayer and the name of God grant power to oil to remove the presence of evil, and baptism becomes an occasion on which the powers of evil are rejected and exorcised from the initiate. Cyril understands that in baptism the volatile existence of the powers of the old and new age come to the fore. For him, as for Tertullian and Origen, the world of the suprahuman interacts with the human world. Believers, however, have been empowered to overcome and to affect the satanic realm through divine assistance petitioned in prayer, present in sacred oil, enacted through angelic beings, and confirmed by God’s Spirit. While additional examples could be included, these suffice to demonstrate that the cosmic existence Paul describes in 2 Corinthians 10–13, in which believers engage in a spiritual war, is an existence adhered to by some of the early fathers. This project views the apostle’s mystical experience as one that is significant, affirmed, and revelatory and, therefore, aligns with the perspectives of the writers presented here. In addition, the ensuing analysis combines viewing this experience as significant with an exploration of the apostle’s heavenly journey through a lens of spiritual warfare in which the power of God and the power of Satan oppose one another, a position that also corresponds with the perception of the world of these early Christian expositors.

141

Ibid., 3.3.2 (224). Ibid., 3.3.6. 143 Cyril of Jerusalem, On the Mysteries 2.3 (Piédagnal and Paris, 181–182). 142

1.5 Argument of this Study

33

1.5 Argument of this Study 1.5 Argument of this Study

1.5.1 A Fresh Approach: Paul’s Cosmic Battle Imagery In some ways, this project builds upon the valuable insights of the early fathers who viewed Paul’s ascent as a significant event with deep theological implications. Additionally, it undertakes the challenge of examining a cosmological perspective shared by these writers and Paul by exploring the apostle’s own satanic language. This study also builds upon the important work of Lincoln, Tabor, Gooder, and Wallace, all of whom assess Paul’s ascent as a crucial event as well.144 It extends Wallace’s proposal that the event is about more than apostleship and Gooder’s thesis that the theme of opposition is a central motif in the ascent. Yet this thesis also differs from all of their work in substantial ways. The subsequent analysis underscores five significant related elements of the last four chapters of the letter, elements which are not sufficiently discussed or are omitted in recent research, but all of which are needed to understand Paul’s ascent presentation: 1) the relationship between the warfare imagery in chapter 10 to the ascent episode in chapter 12; 2) the persistence of this military language throughout the final chapters of the epistle; 3) the combination of cosmic warfare imagery with epistemological terms in the beginning of chapter 10 (10:3–6); 4) the presence of Satanic language in chapters 11 and 12 (11:3–6, 13–15; 12:7; cf. 10:5); and 5) the appropriation of cosmological, epistemological, and anthropological language throughout these last chapters and, specifically in 12:1–10. 145 Such terminology indicates that Paul’s perspective is wider than conflicts surrounding his own apostleship. Paul’s words emphasize that a cosmic battle is in progress, and that the contested terrain is the human mind and its knowledge of God.146 This contested terrain extends even into the heavenly realms. The martial imagery in chapter 10 provides the lens through which Paul frames the events in Corinth and indicates that he believes something more important than his apostleship is at stake; the Corinthians’ minds and lives are in danger, and they risk becoming victims of Satan himself. 147 For Paul, suprahuman forces shape the Corinthian situation, and the reality of such forces compels him to embrace in his discussion a world beyond just the human realm, although humanity is intricately linked to this reality. Part of Paul’s task in 10–13 involves broadening the Corinthians’ vision to perceive this larger 144 My work also builds upon Price, “Punished in Paradise,” and Morray-Jones, “Paradise Revisited,” who view the angel of Satan as an adversary to Paul’s ascent. See Chapter 3. 145 For my definition of these terms, see 1.5.2. 146 My thanks to J. Ross Wagner for this helpful terminology. 147 Abraham Malherbe (“Antisthenes and Odysseus, and Paul at War,” HTR 76 [1983]: 143–73) writes that the relationship of 10:1–6 “to the rest of chapters 10–13 is difficult to determine” (166). This study attempts to provide a possible way forward.

34

Chapter 1: Introduction

sphere and to recognize the satanic influence operating in their midst. His ascent account becomes a means of accomplishing this mission, for in this encounter he shares his own similar struggle with the forces of evil. This supernatural event underscores the reality of a cosmic struggle, highlighted in chapters 10–13 but foreshadowed as early as 2 Corinthians 2:11 (cf. 1 Cor 15:25– 26). Paul utilizes the depiction of the serpent’s interaction with Eve in Genesis 3 to outline the cosmological framework within which humans encounter evil. His allusion to this story in 11:3–6 provides insight into the origin of this cosmic battle and offers a glimpse into his view of how satanic forces operate among human beings. The apostle’s appropriation of Genesis 3 suggests that for him the narrative opens an important window onto the nature and power of evil, exposes evil’s presence and effect on humans, and reveals humanity’s place in the cosmos. Thus, the following discussion will examine Paul’s perspectives on humanity and on satanic forces, as well as explore how these perspectives allow him to frame the Corinthian situation. In sum, this study will investigate what understanding of the world Paul conveys by utilizing this Genesis account to ground his presentation of the Corinthian situation. Although Paul engages the Corinthians in an argumentative tone in this part of the letter, utilizing irony (11:16–17, 21), sarcasm (11:21; 12:11), entreaty (10:1–2), and threats (10:10–11; 13:2–3), he employs all of these elements for a larger purpose. He informs his hearers of a current cosmic contest that affects their lives and asserts that this battle goes back to the very beginning of time itself, into the apocalyptic drama begun at the dawn of creation. It is a battle between good and evil, between God and Satan (11:3, 14–15), and the Corinthians have become part of this battle just as he himself, a διάκονος of God, has been enlisted for the task of warfare (10:3–6; cf. 3:6; 6:4–7; 1 Cor 3:5). Paul’s framing of the cosmic drama works on several levels in the letter. First, he connects what is happening in the Corinthians’ midst to a larger apocalyptic narrative (11:3–4, 11–15). Second, he presents himself as playing an integral part in this apocalyptic narrative, a role especially highlighted by his weapons in chapter 10 and his ascent account in chapter 12. Third, his report of this ascent links an episode from his life to the Corinthians’ own situation, creating solidarity with his audience. It also exhorts them to resist the satanic emissaries among them and to rely upon God’s grace and power. This study contributes to the ongoing discussion of 2 Corinthians 12:1–10 and its significance by examining its context in relation to the following questions: Why does Paul relate his ascent account, and how does his narration of this experience cohere with the rest of the letter? What is the ascent’s significance in relation to his argument? How does Paul’s sharing of his ascent relate to the events taking place among the Corinthians? In a similar vein, how does the divulgence of his encounter shape the Corinthians’ view of and response to the super-apostles? Finally, what is the relationship between Paul’s ascent to

1.5 Argument of this Study

35

the broader environment of his time, both Jewish and Greco-Roman? Pursuing answers to these questions will provide an alternative view of this well-known pericope. This investigation situates the apostle within his Hellenistic-Jewish matrix and provides a window into his cosmology, epistemology, and theological anthropology. The thesis for this study consists of the following three related points: First, the ascent episode is connected with the issues of cosmology, epistemology, and theological anthropology in 2 Corinthians 10, and thereby offers a fitting climax to chapters 10–13. The warfare imagery of chapter 10 and the notion of cosmic conflict around the knowledge of God remain important motifs in these chapters. Identifying these martial terms and examining the continuity of this language in the last four chapters is vital to understanding why Paul reveals this event to his audience. Second, Paul’s ascent provides the Corinthians with a glimpse into the reality of satanic opposition to knowledge of God and the reality of divine triumph over satanic obstruction. Third, Paul discloses this ascent precisely because of its theological relevance and significance for his audience. The Corinthian situation presents a prime opportunity for him to connect his own story with the events currently taking place in the Corinthian congregation. His heavenly journey exhorts the Corinthians to resist the satanic ministers and to rely upon God’s grace and power. Paul presents his ascent (2 Cor 12:1–10) as a paradigm of spiritual warfare: satanic obstruction to knowledge of and from God and divine triumph over satanic opposition. Since his encounter mirrors to a certain extent what is happening in Corinth, the apostle reports this episode as “testimonial evidence” that satanic action, despite its persistence, does not overcome God’s activity. 1.5.2 Definition of Terms 1.5.2.1 Cosmic, Cosmological, and Apocalyptic Up to this point the words “cosmic,” “cosmological,” and “apocalyptic” have been used somewhat interchangeably. The definition of these terms used in this study takes its cues from Paul’s own words. As seen by his language in 2 Corinthians 10:3–6; 11:3–4, 14–15; 12:7 (cf. 2:11; 4:4), Paul has a view of the world in which the human and the supernatural realms interpenetrate and intermingle in a manner that shows the two spheres are inextricably linked, with humans and suprahuman beings interacting, often with dangerous consequences. For Paul, “human and spiritual beings share social space.”148 What happens in the supernatural sphere leads to repercussions in the human sphere, and, likewise, humanity’s actions affect the supernatural plane. Accordingly,

148 This phrase comes from Stuckenbruck, “Prayers of Deliverance,” 163. See also footnote 135.

36

Chapter 1: Introduction

the conflict taking place in the supernatural realm between God and Satan involves humanity. In the case of the Corinthian situation, the arena of battle between the two focuses primarily on the mind and revolves around the knowledge of God. Although Paul holds to the view that Satan and satanic forces have power in the human realm, he believes they have been decisively defeated at the cross and that their ultimate defeat lies ahead in the eschaton (2:11; 4:4; 6:7; 10:3–6; cf. 1 Cor 15:25–26, 52–55, 57). The present age, however, is one in which God and Satan, and their respective emissaries engage in combat. For the purposes of this project, “apocalyptic,” “cosmic,” and “cosmological” is broadly defined as the sharing of social space by humans and suprahuman beings in which each realm and the actions within that realm affect the other.149 Specifically, in terms of 2 Corinthians 10– 13, I define apocalyptic and cosmic as the sharing of social space between humans and suprahumans, which encompasses the conflict between God and Satan in both the supernatural and human realms for the minds of the Corinthians in regard to knowledge of God.150 The idea of apocalyptic/cosmic entails the reality of suprahuman beings and their power and incorporates the recognition of an ancient struggle between God and Satan.151

149 This view of apocalyptic is similar to Martinus C. de Boer’s cosmological pattern, which he identifies as one track of dualism. For de Boer, this cosmological pattern includes the idea that the world is under the dominion of evil angelic powers and that God’s rights over the world have been arrogated by these enemies. God’s elect, however, await God’s final deliverance when God will invade the world and ultimately defeat the evil powers in a cosmic war. These evil powers have perverted and wreaked havoc upon the earth, but God, in the final judgment, will rectify and overcome all opposition. See de Boer’s discussion in “Paul and Apocalyptic Eschatology,” The Encyclopedia of Apocalypticism, ed. John J. Collins (New York: Continuum, 1998), 1:358–359. 150 In other epistles, Paul’s concern includes sin’s complete domination of the human person and not just the mind. For example, in Romans, he depicts sin as a power which enslaves the total being (cf. Rom 5:20–21; 6:12–14). Yet in 2 Cor 10–13, Paul does not mention sin as a power but Satan. He does mention in 12:21 and 13:2 “those who have sinned previously,” but this is not a depiction of sin as a power per se but rather sin as encompassing particular actions, which he lists in 12:20–21. 151 I do not think the view of this study contradicts the idea of the gospel as an apocalyptic intervention in which God invades the cosmos through the Christ event. For Paul, the gospel is God’s decisive act in redeeming the world and the Christ event occurs to address its tragic situation, a situation which existed, at least in Paul’s eyes, as far back as Genesis. Ever since the beginning, humans and spiritual beings have shared social space, and the cosmos has been the scene of an ongoing struggle, as attested in such literature as the Book of Watchers and Jubilees. Thus, the notion of apocalyptic in this work is twofold: 1) incorporating the ongoing struggle between God and humans with satanic forces and 2) viewing as apocalyptic the Christ event, which is God’s invasive act that intensifies this struggle. In regard to 2 Cor 10–13, the scene of struggle is the mind, and Paul sees a parallel to what is taking place in Corinth with what occurs in Genesis.

1.5 Argument of this Study

37

Furthermore, Paul’s brief narrative of his ascent exemplifies elements characteristic of the genre “apocalypse” as defined by the Society of Biblical Literature Genres Project in Semeia 14 in 1979. They defined an apocalypse as “a genre of revelatory literature with a narrative framework, in which a revelation is mediated by an otherworldly being to a human recipient, disclosing a transcendent reality which is both temporal, insofar as it envisages eschatological salvation, and spatial insofar as it involves another, supernatural world.”152 Although Paul’s ascent narrative does not include all of the features outlined in the definition, a significant number do appear. Paul speaks of an otherworldly journey and of visions and revelations. The apostle does not mention an angelic interpreter, but he does encounter an angel of Satan as a result of this journey. Paul’s heavenly ascent also corresponds to the view of the world common in many apocalypses. John Collins observes that in apocalypses “there is a hidden world of angels and demons that is directly relevant to human destiny.… In short, human life is bounded in the present by the supernatural world of angels and demons.” 153 Collins’s observation regarding apocalypses holds true for Paul’s conception of the κόσµος. Indeed, he participates in the genre’s “conceptual structure or view of the world,”154 for he speaks of Satan (11:14; 12:7; cf. 2:11), angels (11:14; 12:7), and a different spirit (11:4). He shares a cosmological understanding found within apocalypses in which these entities are real and affect all of humanity. 155 This conceptual structure provides an important foundation for the framework of his discussion in 2 Corinthians 10–13. 1.5.2.2 Epistemology and Theological Anthropology In addition to cosmic and apocalyptic language, the apostle employs epistemological/cognitive terminology such as the knowledge of God (γνῶσις τοῦ θεοῦ 10:5). The phrase “knowledge of God” occurs in 4:4 and in10:5, and in each case it is introduced as something the enemy opposes. Moreover, additional examples of epistemic language such as νόηµα (10:5; 11:3; cf. 4:4), λόγισµος and its cognates (10:2b, 4, 7, 11; 11:5; 12:6), συνίηµι (10:12), γνῶσις (11:6), οἶδα (12:2, 3; cf. 11:11) and φρονέω (13:11) demonstrate that an important concern for Paul in this letter is knowledge and how conflict surrounds or takes 152

As quoted in John J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 5. 153 Ibid., 8. 154 Ibid. 155 Such a reading coheres with Ernst Käsemann’s observation that “Man for Paul is never on his own, but he is always a specific piece of world and therefore becomes what he is by determination from outside, by the power which takes possession of him and the lordship to which he surrenders himself. His life is from the beginning a stake in the confrontation between God and the principalities of this world” (emphasis mine; “On the Subject of Primitive Christian Apocalyptic” in New Testament Questions of Today [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969], 136).

38

Chapter 1: Introduction

place in regard to knowledge of God. This language, then, raises the issue of Pauline epistemology and how the apostle views the relationship between epistemology and apocalyptic conflict in which forces opposed to God attempt to obstruct knowledge of God. This study utilizes the definition of religious epistemology given by Shane Berg. He defines it in the following way: Religious epistemology … comprises the implicit and explicit claims and assumptions made by an author concerning the possibility of, and access to, religious knowledge, as well as the larger conceptual frame of reference within which such claims and assumptions find their origin and ground. In simpler and more concrete terms, the study of religious epistemology is primarily concerned with how an author’s claims about religious knowledge relate to the larger context of that author’s patterns of thought and argument. 156

This definition will serve as the basis for the following discussion of Paul’s epistemological concerns. This study will examine how Paul’s claims about knowledge of God relate to his view of the suprahuman world and the apocalyptic conflict taking place between God and Satan. Cognitive language in this epistle and its relationship to Paul’s martial imagery warrant greater examination due to the insight it provides into the structure of Paul’s epistemology. An important element of Paul’s epistemological framework is his view of the human being and its ability to access knowledge of God. The terms anthropology or theological anthropology, therefore, refer to the human being and her/his place in the cosmos, which is ultimately affected by suprahuman forces. As will be demonstrated, Paul takes part in traditions in which the suprahuman world affects human knowledge of God. Spirits either facilitate or hinder human access to divine knowledge. 1.5.3 Methodology The present study is divided into four main sections and incorporates two primary methodologies: detailed historical-critical exegesis and comparative analysis of contemporaneous texts. The current chapter provides an introduction to the main issues surrounding the interpretation of 2 Corinthians 12:1–10 as well as lays out the overall approach. Chapter 2 includes a close reading of chapters 10–13 of 2 Corinthians in order to situate Paul’s heavenly journey in its immediate context. Such an analysis is necessary to trace Paul’s use of military imagery, cosmic conflict themes, and opposition language, as well as the epistemological terms in these chapters. At the same time, this exegetical exploration will also investigate passages that appear earlier in the letter, specifically sections of chapters 2, 4, and 5. Examining these earlier passages provide the opportunity to outline the development of these motifs in 2 Corinthians. The exegetical analysis will incorporate other literature of the period such as 156 Shane Berg, “Religious Epistemologies in the Dead Sea Scrolls: The Heritage and Transformation of the Wisdom Tradition” (PhD diss., Yale University, 2008), 3.

1.5 Argument of this Study

39

The Greek Life of Adam and Eve, The War Scroll, 1QS 3.13–4.26 (Treatise of the Two Spirits), 1QHa , and the Aramaic Levi Document, which shed light on the cosmological, epistemological, and anthropological patterns of thought in which Paul participates. They constitute appropriate conversation partners for 2 Corinthians 10–13 because they provide a window into Paul’s wider historical and socio-cultural environment. Along with providing a larger context for Paul’s ascent by surveying the above texts in Chapter 2, Chapter 3 incorporates an examination of additional texts which relate in some way to the motifs of ascent/descent, opposition to knowledge of God, and/or the power of evil suprahuman beings (Book of Watchers, Book of Parables, Daniel, Apocalypse of Abraham, Jubilees, De Sera Numinis Vindicta, De Genio Socratis, Ascension of Isaiah, 11Q5, Aramaic Levi Document, Noahic Prayer in Jubilees, Hekhalot Zutarti and Merkabah Rabbah, and The Mithras Liturgy). These writings contain traditions that shed light on Paul’s own ascent report and contribute to understanding and interpreting the ways in which Paul frames his experience. While this section will not be exhaustive by any means, it will enhance the subsequent analysis since these documents provide evidence that Paul’s language and discourse participate in a “complex web of traditions” upon which he draws to tell his cosmic story.157 As illustrated by the choice of texts for Chapter 3, this study will include other ascent narratives as well as non-ascent texts that deal with the satanic and the demonic world, including prayers of deliverance. The integration of these bodies of work into the analysis of 12:1–10 allows focus only upon the features of these texts that are directly relevant to Paul’s ascent.158 The investigation will conclude with an alternative reading of 12:1–10 that draws upon findings from this close reading of 2 Corinthians 10–13 and these additional texts.

157 I borrow this phrase from Loren T. Stuckenbruck, “Demonic Beings and the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in Explaining Evil, vol. 1, Definitions and Development, ed. J. Harold Ellens, Psychology, Religion and Spirituality (Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, 2011), 122. 158 A number of interpreters have provided in-depth analyses of many ascent texts. E.g., Mary Dean-Otting, Heavenly Journeys: A Study of the Motif in Hellenistic Jewish Literature, JU 8 (Frankfurt Am Main: Peter Lang, 1984); Martha Himmelfarb, Ascent to Heaven in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993); Martha Himmelfarb, “The Practice of Ascent in the Ancient Mediterranean World” in Death, Ecstasy, and Other Worldly Journeys, eds. John J. Collins and Michael Fishbane (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995), 123–137; Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet; Morray-Jones, “Paradise Revisited,” 177–217, 265–292; Alan F. Segal, “Paul and the Beginning of Jewish Mysticism,” in Death, Ecstasy, and Other Worldly Journeys, 94–122; Tabor, Things Unutterable; Wallace, Snatched into Paradise. Thus, I do not believe I need to engage in such analysis here. My own contribution consists of highlighting texts that have been overlooked in relation to Paul’s ascent and showing a relationship between aspects of texts that have been previously engaged to the apocalyptic framework proposed in this study.

40

Chapter 1: Introduction

It is important to note that this exploration does not postulate direct influence from these extracanonical texts upon Paul or suggest that Paul actually read these particular writings. Rather, such a comparative exercise provides an opportunity to explore works with similar language, ideas, and concepts. Placing Paul in conversation with other texts roughly contemporaneous with him and that share elements of his conceptual environment will highlight affinities as well as differences. This conversation facilitates an exploration of structural patterns that casts further light upon Paul. Umberto Eco’s valuable concept of encyclopedia, which he relates to how humans produce and understand texts, is another fruitful way to think about the links between Paul and his larger milieu and, therefore, will be employed in this study. 159 In his work, Eco discusses the difference between two semantic models: the dictionary model and the encyclopedia model. The dictionary model explains language by concise definitions, which is very limiting. However, in the encyclopedia model, “every item of a language must be interpreted by every other possible linguistic item which, according to some previous cultural conventions, can be associated with it.”160 The existence of associative links enables one to interpret an item in light of these correlative connections. 161 Thus, encyclopedic competence entails utilizing an “immense web of interpretants” to move from point A to point B in acquiring meaning.162 The existence of the web means that those seeking to understand a text will employ their web of interpretants to understand the author’s perspective or words. Eco asserts that when an expression is uttered in a specific context, the hearer selects the interpretant that, according to the cultural encyclopedia, fits the context.163 Eco’s notion of a cultural encyclopedia of a text takes into account both the implied and the overt knowledge presupposed by the author and the author’s audience due to the text’s creation in a particular cultural climate. For example, the modern idea of human beings as autonomous creatures able to retrieve knowledge on their own is arguably foreign to Paul, especially as it relates to gaining knowledge of the divine realm. To access the epistemological framework of Paul’s words in 2 Corinthians is to recognize that for him epistemology is connected to cosmology and anthropology. To grasp the connections Paul makes between these three dimensions by exploring other historical occurrences in which such associations abound is to become mindful that for Paul and his audience these spheres cannot be trifurcated but overlap in ways not 159

Umberto Eco, The Limits of Interpretation (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990), 143. 160 Ibid. 161 Ibid., 143–144. 162 Ibid., 145. 163 Ibid., 266.

1.5 Argument of this Study

41

necessarily discerned when using modern sensibilities and structures. Structural patterns appear within a cultural climate that gives rise to the patterns and determines how these patterns have meaning and what meanings these patterns convey. Eco’s research sheds light on Paul’s language in 2 Corinthians 10–13 in several ways. The associations Paul makes between epistemology, cosmology, and anthropology are part of his cultural encyclopedia in which these areas repeatedly converge. Paul’s making such connections, then, reflects his recognition that such complex understandings of the world already exist. Eco’s formulations allow us to maintain that this perspective moves beyond speaking of Paul’s background to discussing the apostle’s foreground. The links Paul makes between the human being, knowledge, and the suprahuman realm are indications that Paul joins in this cultural interpretation of reality and is an intricate part of the larger discourse. Furthermore, the existence of an “immense web” regarding opposition to divine knowledge allows Paul to depict this opposition in a variety of ways in the letter: blindness (4:4), affliction (4:7– 12; 6:4–10; 11:22–33), deception (11:3), a different spirit (11:4), false apostles (11:13), and a demonic entity (12:7). Paul is able to utilize an immense web to describe satanic activity because such a web already exists. To employ Eco’s concept is to bring about a thick analysis that identifies and seeks to understand the patterns of thought deemed relevant, significant, and foundational to the construction of reality for Paul during this time period. The exegetical examinations within Chapters 2 and 3, then, necessitate a deep involvement with Jewish and Greco-Roman texts and ideas that foster contextualization and enhance awareness of Paul’s structural patterns. Indeed, the survey of texts in Chapters 2 and 3 allows for a richer understanding of the world in which Paul lived and opens the space for an alternative interpretation of 2 Corinthians 12:1–10. Chapter 4 closes with a summary and some brief conclusions regarding this way of reading Paul. 1.5.3.1 A Word Regarding Paul’s Opponents Before proceeding further, this study’s approach to the identity of Paul’s rivals needs to be addressed briefly. From Paul’s language one can infer that the situation in Corinth involves certain Jewish Christians (11:22–23) who have come into the Corinthian congregations with letters of commendation, claiming to have a higher authority than Paul (10:15–18; 11:12–21; cf. 3:1-3). Evidently, they were eloquent speakers (10:10; 11:6) who received financial support from the Corinthians (11:7, 20).164 The perspective maintained in this study is that

164 Some scholars would also include in the description of the opponents that they boasted of revelations. Wallace’s observation (Snatched into Paradise) that nowhere in 2 Cor 10–13 does Paul allude to visions or revelations of his opponents is instructive (22).

42

Chapter 1: Introduction

the false apostles of 11:13 and the super-apostles of 11:5 and 12:11 are identical and not two separate groups with which Paul contends.165 Although they are Jewish Christians (11:22), they do not appear to be the same as the Teachers who entered the Galatian churches. Paul never mentions circumcision or following the law as part of their gospel message, which is noteworthy since he does not hesitate to bring up these issues elsewhere (cf. Gal 2:14–16; 4:1–10; 5:2–6; Phil 3:2–9). Likewise, Udo Schnelle remarks: An keiner Stelle erwähnt Paulus jedoch eine Beschneidungsforderung der Gegner. Der Apostel geht auf alle Aktivitäten und Vorwürfe der Gegner ein, so dass er die Beschneidung sicher genannt hätte, wäre sie propagiert worden. Deshalb können die Gegner im 2Kor nicht im gleichen Sinn als Judaisten bezeichnet werden wie die Gegner im Gal. Beschneidung und damit auch die Gesetzesfrage sind im 2Kor nicht Gegenstand der Auseinandersetzung.166

Schnelle rightly maintains that the issues in Corinth are different from those in Galatia and this will be the view undergirding the ensuing analysis, for all we are told by Paul concerning the message of his rivals is that it was a different

165 Among those who hold that Paul confronts two different groups are Käsemann, Die Legitimität, 25–30, who claims that the false apostles are envoys from the Jerusalem church but the super-apostles are the twelve original apostles; Barrett, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 30–32, argues that the false apostles are Judaizing Jews from the Jerusalem church (super-apostles) but are probably not acting in accord with orders from the mother church; Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 67–87, also maintains that Paul deals with two different groups. Scholars who embrace the view adopted here in which the appellations false apostles and super-apostles refer to the same group, the opponents, who have come into Corinth and not the apostles in Jerusalem, include Barnett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 522–523; Furnish, II Corinthians, 48–51; Craig S. Keener, 1–2 Corinthians, NCBC (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 227; Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:671–676; Matera, II Corinthians, 246–247. Those who believe Paul deals with two different groups, the super-apostles and the false apostles, come to this conclusion because of Paul’s statements that he is not inferior in any way to the super-apostles (11:5; 12:11). They construe these statements as Paul placing himself on the same rank as these apostles and, therefore, cannot be the same as the false apostles or deceitful workers he castigates in 11:13–15 as servants of Satan. Paul would never place himself on the same plane with servants of Satan. Consequently, Paul must be referring to the apostles in Jerusalem when he makes such statements since this type of language (i.e. super-apostles) coheres with the language of “pillars” that he uses in Galatians (Gal 2:9). Yet as Matera (II Corinthians) notes, Paul’s statements in 11:5 and 12:11 can be construed in a different way. Paul is not claiming a comparable status to the super-apostles when he makes these assertions; rather, using understatement, he declares his superiority over them. This term, super-apostles, becomes an ironic appellation indicating how his opponents present themselves and perhaps even how the Corinthians view them (247). 166 Schnelle, “Der 2 Korintherbrief und die Mission gegen Paulus,” 317. He believes that it is possible that Paul’s rivals appealed to their special relationship with the historical Jesus and their legitimization by the early church, views which are similar to Käsemann. See discussion of Käsemann in 1.3.4.

1.6 Summary

43

gospel.167 Instructive also is that he attributes their advent to Satan and to a different spirit.

1.6 Summary 1.6 Summary

This study argues that in chapter 10 Paul delineates a stark dualistic and antithetical framework for the rest of the letter by forefronting an apocalyptic/cosmic contest that incorporates humans as participants. To be sure, cosmic elements appear in earlier parts of the epistle (2 Cor 2:11; 4:4; 6:15), but here we have to do with elaborate, explicit military language combined with apocalyptic/cosmic features. This study aims to demonstrate that in the opening verses of chapter 10 Paul’s martial imagery presents his readers with a cosmology deeply integrated with his epistemology and anthropology. In these verses, he provides an overarching framework for his subsequent discussion. For Paul, spiritual forces affect humanity’s ability to access knowledge of God. Many interpreters assume that Paul’s heavenly journey relates primarily to his defense against the super-apostles. But in fact, he has something more important in view: the minds and lives of the Corinthians, whom he loves and for whom he would gladly be spent (2 Cor 12:15), are in danger of becoming victims of satanic opposition and deception. Therefore, these passages are about far more than apostolic authority. They are about God’s war in and for the world, the nature of that war, and the implications of this apocalyptic/cosmic battle for its participants. By placing this cosmic battle at the beginning of chapter 10, Paul makes this contest primary and it remains the framework with which he engages his audience throughout 10–13. This framework, then, undergirds the major aspects of his presentation including his ascent account. The ascent episode itself (2 Cor 12:1–10) plays a pivotal role in his larger argument, and in this event the themes of warfare, cosmology, epistemology, and anthropology once again converge in a heightened manner. The apostle’s Entrückung is a paradigm of both satanic obstruction of knowledge and divine triumph over all opposition. Since his experience reflects the current events taking place in the Corinthian congregation, he presents this account as “testimonial evidence” of spiritual warfare, affirming that satanic opposition does not overcome God’s

167

There are a variety of hypotheses concerning the identity of these opponents. The ideas range from Gnostics of Palestinian origin who boast of pneumatic experiences to wandering Hellenistic Jewish pneumatics. Other views include Hellenistic diaspora Jews or Palestinian Jewish Christians from the Jerusalem church, similar to Paul’s opponents in Galatia. For a thorough discussion of the various views, see Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 77– 87.

44

Chapter 1: Introduction

power. As will be seen in the following analysis, Paul’s life experience becomes a means to proclaim to the Corinthians that like him they can triumph over the enemy through divine aid.

Chapter 2

Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia: Martial Language and the Cosmological, Epistemological, and Anthropological Nexus 2.1 Introduction 2.1 Introduction

The last chapter set forth the proposal that Paul’s warfare language, along with cosmic elements in the opening verses of 2 Corinthians 10, indicate that his argument in the final portions of the letter represents more than a defense of his apostolic authority. In this chapter this thesis will be discussed in more detail. With vivid terminology, the apostle frames the Corinthian situation through an apocalyptic/cosmic battle lens. Nestled within Paul’s martial imagery lie epistemological terms which bring the conflict surrounding the mind and knowledge to the forefront. It will be argued that his battle imagery provides the framework for the rest of the letter, including his ascent. This chapter will analyze Paul’s martial terminology and investigate its relationship to his epistemological, cosmological, and anthropological language. The argument in this chapter will proceed in four major stages. The first consists of a brief examination of the relationship between 2 Corinthians 10:1– 2 and 10:3–6. Whereas the second explores Paul’s use of the phrase κατὰ σάρκα (10:2–3) and its relationship to his claim to wield divine weapons, the third traces the use of the apostle’s military terms and demonstrates that his martial imagery, which begins in chapter 10, continues throughout the remaining four chapters. In addition, this portion of the analysis discusses how this martial imagery and its cosmic context foregrounds a struggle within the human and divine realms. This component of the exploration necessitates putting Paul in conversation with sections of the War Scroll and 1QS 3.13–4.26 (Treatise of the Two Spirits). Similar to Paul, the War Scroll and The Treatise of the Two Spirits describe a struggle that involves both human and suprahuman participants. The intersection of epistemology, cosmology, and anthropology in these writings exhibits important affinities with Paul’s perspective in 2 Corinthians 10–13. The fourth and last stage addresses further the apostle’s epistemological language and the connection between this language and his martial imagery. Such an investigation includes asking whether such a connection exists, and if so, on what terms. This examination of the apostle’s cognitive terminology

46

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

considers his use of Genesis 1–3 and traditions surrounding these passages as they illustrate his participation in Jewish ideas that link the mind, knowledge of God, and suprahuman forces. Along with Genesis, we examine parts of 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document in which such links can also be illustrated. This analysis will demonstrate that Paul’s language in 2 Corinthians 10– 13 is part of a broader conversation, a “cultural encyclopedia” as it were, involving a dynamic interplay of epistemological, cosmological, and anthropological elements.1

2.2 Prelude to War: The Apostle’s Appeal to the Meekness and Gentleness of Christ (10:1–2) 2.2 Prelude to War (1) Αὐτὸς δὲ ἐγὼ Παῦλος παρακαλῶ ὑµᾶς διὰ τῆς πραΰτητος καὶ ἐπιεικείας τοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὅς κατὰ πρόσωπον µὲν ταπεινὸς ἐν ὑµῖν, ἀπὼν δὲ θαρρῶ εἰς ὑµᾶς (2) δέοµαι δὲ τὸ µὴ παρὼν θαρρῆσαι τῇ πεποιθήσει ᾗ λογίζοµαι τολµῆσαι ἐπί τινας τούς λογιζοµένους ἡµᾶς ὡς κατὰ σὰρκα περιπατοῦντας. (1) “I, Paul myself, urge you through the meekness and gentleness of Christ, I who am lowly among you in person, but bold towards you when absent (2) ask that when I am present I do not need to be bold with the confidence with which I am seriously thinking about using in a daring manner against some who consider us as walking according to the flesh.”2

The vivid war imagery in chapter 10 occurs against a background where Paul makes an appeal to the Corinthians on the basis of Christ’s meekness and gentleness (10:1). He has made earlier appeals to the Corinthians using the same verb παρακαλέω that appears in 10:1. In 2 Corinthians 2:8 he urges them to renew their love for the offender in their midst, and in 2 Corinthians 5:20 he informs the Corinthians that God makes an appeal through him to encourage them to be reconciled to God. Paul’s coupling of παρακαλέω with δέοµαι in 5:20 and here in 10:1–2 illustrates the urgent nature of his request.3 Also, in 6:1 Paul exhorts the Corinthians not to accept the grace of God in vain. In each of these instances, Paul urges some kind of action on the Corinthians’ part, but unlike these earlier entreaties in the letter, however, Paul does not explicitly lay out in 10:1–2 the actions he wants the Corinthians to take. Nonetheless, he implicitly signals to them that those in their midst who accuse him of living or

1 For the concept of “cultural encyclopedia” see Umberto Eco, The Limits of Interpretation (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990). 2 Translations of 2 Corinthians are the author’s unless otherwise noted. 3 Both of these terms, παρακαλέω and δέοµαι, occur together in 8:4 as well. However, there the subject consists of the churches of Macedonia who urge Paul to allow them to be part of the collection. Also, in 8:6 Paul speaks of encouraging or urging Titus (cf. 1 Cor 1:10).

2.2 Prelude to War

47

walking according to the flesh (10:2) should no longer be around when he arrives. Or, at least, they should no longer have sway over the congregation. Thus, in 10:1 and in 10:2, Paul’s exhortation indicates that he does not want to be placed in the situation of having to be courageous or bold in opposing his detractors when he arrives in Corinth. 4 Yet he will rise to the occasion if necessary (12:20–21; 13:1–3; cf. 1 Cor 4:21). At first glance, Paul’s language of meekness (πραΰτης), gentleness (ἐπιείκεια), and lowliness (ταπεινός) serve as an ironic backdrop to the subsequent warfare imagery. 5 However, the juxtaposition of such language reflects the way Paul begins this section of the letter by invoking the character of Christ as the basis for his “lowliness.”6 In effect, Paul overturns the charge of lowliness hurled at him by his opponents and some of the Corinthians by maintaining that his behavior follows Christ’s own pattern of life.7 For Margaret Thrall, the apostle recalls Jesus’s self-emptying and uses this action by Jesus as a basis for his own actions. 8 Paul’s description of Jesus in these opening verses corresponds with his statement in 13:4 that Jesus was crucified out of weakness. The meekness and lowliness that characterized Jesus’s entire life, both earthly and pre-existent, can be seen in the forsaking of his own life and his submission to death on the cross. His willingness to take on “the literal weakness and lowliness” 9 of humanity included everything this weakness and lowliness entailed, even becoming sin and surrendering to death. Such an interpretation coheres with Paul’s earlier statements that Jesus became sin even though he knew no sin (2 Cor 5:20) and that he became poor although he was rich (2 Cor 8:9). 4 In 2 Cor 13:10, Paul repeats and extends this plea not to have to be bold when he arrives for his third visit. He has authority, but he wants to use it for building up not tearing down (cf. 10:8). In a similar vein Thomas Schmeller, Der Zweite Brief an die Korinther (2Kor 7,5– 13,13), EKK 8 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchen Verlag, 2015), “Der Gemeinde wird mit großer Eindringlichkeit und Härte gezeigt, was für sie auf dem Spiel steht. Sie gerät mindestens in die Nähe einer gegnerischen Kriegspartei, die von einem General Gottes bekämpft und besiegt wird. Das Ziel ist, dieses Szenario nicht Wirklichkeit werden zu lassen (vgl. 13,10)” (2:134). 5 Paul’s other use of ταπεινός in 2 Corinthians occurs in 7:6. 6 C. K. Barrett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, HNTC (New York: Harper & Row, 1973), 246; Margaret E. Thrall, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, ICC 47 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000), 2:599–602. 7 Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:599–602. 8 Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, raises the question of whether Paul refers to “the historical life of Jesus” or “the heavenly Christ.” She ultimately concludes that “Paul is thinking of the ‘meekness’ of the preexistent Christ, who freely took upon himself the lowly condition of humanity and died an humiliating death” (2:600). However, it is more than likely that Paul refers to both Jesus’s earthly life and pre-existence. So also Schmeller, Der Zweite Brief an die Korinther, 2:127. 9 Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:602.

48

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

In these opening verses, Paul reminds the Corinthians of the character of their Lord, offering a stark contrast to the false apostles whose domineering personalities and actions the Corinthians wholeheartedly accept (11:20). Here the remarks of Thomas Schmeller are apropos: Indem er auf die Milde Christi verweist, stellt er die Weichen für ein richtiges Verständnis seines sanften Auftretens in der Gemeinde: Es handelt sich nicht um Kriecherei, sondern um den bewussten Verzicht auf Machtausübung nach dem Vorbild Christi. Als mögliche Bezugspunkte der »Sanftmut und Milde Christi« werden das Verhalten Jesu während seines irdischen Lebens (vgl. Mt 11, 29) oder aber die Selbstentäußerung, die er in der Menschwerdung vollzog (vgl. Phil 2,7f), genannt. Die Diskussion ist hier also ähnlich wie die zu 2Kor 8,9. Die bei der Erklärung dieser Stelle genannten Argumente sind zum großen Teil auch für 10,1 zutreffend. Mir scheint deshalb auch hier ein Bezug zur Präexistenz und Inkarnation Christi naheliegend.10

As indicated by Schmeller’s statements, Paul both reminds the Corinthians of Jesus’s character and connects his own behavior to that of the Lord. 11 Although the Corinthians and Paul’s opponents view his behavior as negative, the apostle asserts that his behavior imitates Christ’s own life. Thrall sums up this view nicely, writing, “[Paul] sets [ταπεινός] in a context which throws a new light on its apparently negative content. He has just appealed to the ‘meekness’ of Christ, in a way which implies a correspondence between Christ and himself as an apostle. Thus, his own ταπεινότης is based on the πραΰτης of Christ himself.”12 Thrall’s statement highlights Paul’s presentation of his identity as a reflection of Christ. The apostle makes similar connections earlier in 2 Corinthians. For example, in 4:7–12 the sufferings he endures in his body reflect Christ’s own sufferings (1:3–6; cf. 13:4), and in 12:15, Paul declares that due to his love for the Corinthians, he would gladly be spent for them, revealing another instance in which he implicitly compares himself to Christ. As Christ emptied himself for humanity, so Paul would be emptied for the Corinthians. It is through Christ’s pattern of self-giving that Paul proceeds to urge the Corinthians to action. It is also through Christ that he accesses divine power and confidence to act boldly when necessary. Although Paul appeals to Christ’s meekness and gentleness, he maintains that exhibiting boldness when he comes to Corinth is not out of the question. He writes later in 2 Corinthians 10, “Such as we are in word through the letters while away, so we will be in deed when present” (2 Cor 10:11). Just as Christ 10

Schmeller, Der Zweite Brief an die Korinther, 2:127. Jan Lambrecht (“Paul’s Appeal and the Obedience to Christ: The Line of Thought in 2 Corinthians 10, 1–6,” Bib 77 [1996]: 398–416) who maintains that Paul’s appeal is not just about himself but also about the Corinthians writes, “It would appear that the mention of these characteristics of Jesus in 10,1a was intended as grounding Paul’s appeal and providing an example for the Corinthians. They, too, not only Paul, should adopt these virtues” (415). 12 Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:604. 11

2.2 Prelude to War

49

was crucified out of weakness and now lives by the power of God, so too Paul can exhibit Christ’s weakness through his lowliness as well as the power of God in his boldness. Christ’s followers lead lives characterized by a paradoxical existence of lowliness and power. As Erich Gräßer notes, “Letzlich will Paulus mit der christologisch begründeten Paraklese sich sowohl die Gemeinde als auch die Gegner unterwerfen, und zwar höchst paradox mit geharnischter Milde und Sanftmut!”13 Paul will return to this paradox throughout chapters 2 Corinthians 10–13, especially in his ascent account. Paul’s use of τολµάω in 10:2 is the first of three uses in 2 Corinthians 10– 13. In 10:2 he will dare to be bold against his detractors in his future visit (13:1– 3). His employment of τολµάω in 2 Corinthians 10:12 presents a contrast to his speech in 10:2. Although he will dare to be bold against his opponents during his future visit, he will not put himself in the same category as his opponents in 10:12 who have the audacity to compare and classify themselves with one another. In this manner, he will not dare to be bold. However, later in 2 Corinthians 11:21 Paul takes up his opponents’ challenge. Whatever they boast about, he will dare to boast of also. In 2 Corinthians 11:21 Paul does exactly what he accuses his rivals of doing earlier (2 Cor 10:12; 11:18). That Paul succumbs to comparing himself with his rivals is striking, especially in light of his earlier statements. The apostle seems to acknowledge this incongruity with the phrase ἐν ἀφροσύνῃ λέγω (2 Cor 11:21). He has already admitted the foolishness of such an endeavor, acknowledging that this type of behavior indicates a lack of understanding (2 Cor 10:12). Yet here he finds himself doing what he probably does not want to do. At the same time, he takes this opportunity to put a twist on his rivals’ claims. His daring to be bold in 2 Corinthians 10:2 and his daring to boast in 2 Corinthians 11:21 occur within a context in which he claims to be backed by divine power (2 Cor 10:3–6). Therefore, he finds it foolish to compare himself with his opponents because there really is no comparison. The Lord commends him, not them (2 Cor 10:18) and the Lord’s commendation of him is evident in his divine weaponry (2 Cor 10:3–6), his training in knowledge (2 Cor 11:6), and his preaching of God’s gospel to the Corinthians free of charge (2 Cor 11:7). Significantly, in 2 Corinthians 11:6, he declares that his training in knowledge has been revealed in every way and in all things to the Corinthians. Yet for their sake he engages in this comparison “game” to show there really is no comparing him with the rivals. His opponents’ origin (11:12–15; cf. 11:4) and their gospel (11:4) indicate that such an endeavor is foolish. Paul dares to be bold in 2 Corinthians 10:12 and 2 Corinthians 11:21. Although he appeals to the meekness and gentleness of Christ, he maintains that daring and boldness have their place as well. 13 Erich Gräßer, Der Zweite Brief an die Korinther: Kapitel 8,1–13,13, ÖTBK 8/2 (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 2005), 80.

50

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

At the outset of this part of the letter, Paul declares that lowliness and humility do not negate strength and that divine power does not negate gentleness. These are not antithetical attributes, as demonstrated by Christ’s own life and Paul, like Christ, embodies both humility and divine power. Christ’s life and character provides the basis for all that the apostle does because Christ’s own paradoxical existence of humility and power characterizes Paul’s life also. The lowly Paul, who is weak in appearance and has contemptible speech (10:10), carries divinely empowered weapons (10:3–6). The apostle prepares his audience for the likelihood of a display of boldness and power during his next visit. His chutzpah derives from the assurance that God supports him. The confidence with which he intends to be bold against his detractors is a confidence with a divine origin (2 Cor 13:2, 10; cf. 1:9).

2.3 The Significance of the Military Imagery 2.3 The Significance of the Military Imagery (3) ἐν σαρκὶ γὰρ περιπατοῦντες οὐ κατὰ σάρκα στρατευόµεθα (4) τὰ γὰρ ὅπλα τῆς στρατείας ἡµῶν οὐ σαρκικὰ ἀλλὰ δυνατὰ τῷ θεῷ πρὸς καθαὶρεσιν ὀχυρωµάτων, λογισµοὺς καθαιροῦντες (5) καὶ πᾶν ὕψωµα ἐπαιρόµενον κατὰ τῆς γνώσεως τοῦ θεοῦ, καὶ αἰχµαλωτίζοντες πᾶν νόηµα εἰς τὴν ὑπακοὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ, (6) καὶ ἐν ἑτοίµῳ ἔχοντες ἐκδικῆσαι πᾶσαν παρακοήν, ὅταν πληρωθῇ ὑµῶν ἡ ὑπακοή. (3) “For although we walk in the flesh we do not wage a war campaign according to the flesh. (4) For the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly but mighty through God for the destruction of strongholds, destroying reasonings (5) and every high entity being raised against the knowledge of God, and capturing every mind for the obedience of Christ, (6) being ready to punish every disobedience, whenever your obedience has been fulfilled.” (10:3–6)

A number of interpreters note the significance of Paul’s warfare imagery at the beginning of chapter 10.14 Murray J. Harris observes that the Christian life as a military operation is a common theme in Paul. Yet he argues that what is distinctive about 2 Corinthians 10:3–6 is that (1) Paul’s struggle is not simply against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms as in Ephesians 6:12

14 These interpreters include Laurie Brink, “A General’s Exhortation to His Troops: Paul’s Military Rhetoric in 2 Cor 10:1–11,” BZ 49 (2005): 191–201; 50 (2006): 74–89; David E. Garland, 2 Corinthians, NAC 29 (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1999); Jan Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, SP 8 (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1999); Frank Matera, II Corinthians (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2003); Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians; Sze-kar Wan, Power in Weakness: Conflict and Rhetoric in Paul’s Second Letter to the Corinthians (Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 2000); David J. Williams, Paul’s Metaphors: Their Context and Character (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1999).

2.3 The Significance of the Military Imagery

51

but against his rivals at Corinth and (2) the military metaphor is sustained.15 Harris’s observations point to Paul’s cosmological perspective in which spiritual forces and humans are interconnected, for Paul’s language in these chapters highlights such connectivity. Victor Furnish makes remarks similar to Harris’s stating, “The metaphor [of a military campaign] continues through v.6…, making this by far the most elaborate instance of the use of military imagery in the Pauline letters.”16 This elaborate use of military imagery underscores the apostle’s depiction of the serious situation in Corinth. 17 Yet as will be demonstrated, the warfare imagery of chapter 10 continues in the following three chapters and fundamentally shapes Paul’s presentation of his ascent. By commencing this section of the epistle with divine battle language, Paul emphasizes several elements important for the argument in which he is about to engage. First, he establishes the perspective for the rest of the letter and the framework for the Corinthian situation that he addresses. Second, he utilizes this language to underscore the dichotomy between the human and the divine realms. Although humans participate in this conflict, the supernatural nature of the struggle inevitably means that humans need divine assistance. Hence, the apostle emphasizes God’s power behind the weapons and its ability to destroy all opposition. Third, the apostle’s martial imagery points to two opposing powers and focuses the audience on the contested terrain of the mind and knowledge of God. Finally, Paul’s military terminology reveals to his opponents and to the Corinthians that in boasting and in being persuaded by such boasting they fail to perceive the existence of an ongoing cosmic conflict in which opposition to God takes place.18 By not recognizing this reality, the Co-

15

Murray J. Harris, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text, NIGTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 676. Paul also mentions weapons in 2 Corinthians 6:7 in the context of the power of God. Other warfare texts in Paul include 1 Cor 9:7; Phil 2:25; 1 Thess 5:8; Phlm 2; Rom 13:12; cf. 1 Tim 1:18; 6:12; 2 Tim 2:3–4; 4:7. I have also argued that Paul includes military terminology in 2 Corinthians 4-6. See Lisa Bowens, “Investigating the Apocalyptic Texture of Paul’s Martial Imagery in 2 Corinthians 4-6” JSNT 39 (2016): 3-15. 16 Victor P. Furnish, II Corinthians, AB 32A (New York: Doubleday, 1984), 457. 17 Calvin J. Roetzel, “The Language of War (2 Cor. 10:1–6) and the Language of Weakness (2 Cor. 11:21b–13:10)” Bib Int 17 (2009): 77–99, writes, “Only here does [Paul] unleash such a savage explosion of martial metaphors onto the heads of his converts” (79). 18 The present interpretation of the letter assumes that the opponents will be in the audience as Paul’s letter is read publicly. However, there is no way to know this for sure. Yet Paul’s language in 10:1–2 does seem to presuppose that his opponents and those among the Corinthians who follow them will be present when the letter is read and when he arrives for his future visit (cf. 13:1–4). He is preparing for a possible showdown.

52

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

rinthians run the risk of aligning themselves with the wrong side of the conflict.19 Straightaway, Paul refers to the difference between walking or living ἐν σαρκί and waging war κατὰ σάρκα. The next section explores the distinctions the apostle makes between ἐν σαρκί and κατὰ σάρκα and the implications for the cosmic struggle. 2.3.1 Paul’s Use of κατὰ σάρκα in 2 Corinthians Although some think that he conducts himself according to the flesh, Paul maintains that despite the fact that he lives in the flesh (ἐν σαρκί) he does not wage war according to the flesh (κατὰ σάρκα). Paul answers his accusers’ charge by juxtaposing σάρξ/σαρκικός (human realm) and δυνατὰ τῷ θεῷ (divine realm). This juxtaposition can be seen clearly in 10:4 when Paul writes that the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly or human but mighty through God.20 Although Paul concedes that he does live ἐν σαρκί, he presents the flesh as an inadequate source of power for the cosmic combat taking place. The phrase “in the flesh” refers to bodily existence as well as a way of life inherent in the old age. Paul does not juxtapose σάρξ with πνεῦµα as he does elsewhere but instead chooses to contrast σαρκικός and δυνατὰ τῷ θεῷ. His emphasis is clear: “Although I live in a body, I do not wage war according to my body because the flesh is weak and not equipped to handle the real battle taking place behind the scenes.” Robert Jewett’s observations regarding Paul’s distinction between ἐν σαρκί and κατὰ σάρκα are worth quoting at length: That Paul can distinguish between “in the flesh” and “according to the flesh” reveals that he conceives of flesh as a material realm which is nevertheless open in a peculiar fashion to the 19 Based on Paul’s words later in chapter 11, the false apostles do not run the risk of aligning themselves on the wrong side of the war. They are already on the wrong side (11:13– 15). 20 The dative in this verse (τῷ θεῷ) has been explained in various ways: 1) dative of possession: “God’s powerful weapons.” Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, notes that the word order goes against this interpretation (679); 2) instrumental dative but as Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, observes ἐν normally appears with this type of dative (679); 3) it may be a hebraistic use of θεός, meaning “very powerful” (cf. Jon 3:3); 4) a dative of advantage in which case it translates as “for God” or “in God’s service or cause” (679). Both Harris (Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 679) and Thrall (Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:610) opt for the latter even though Harris recognizes that this type of dative occurs more frequently with verbs than with adjectives. However, Paul compares and juxtaposes two types of weapons – fleshly vs. divine. There are weapons that originate from fleshly means and whose power derive from flesh and there are weapons that originate from divine means and whose power derives from God. The translation “for God” or “in God’s service” does not emphasize the contrast Paul makes, even though the weapons are being used for God’s purposes. Thus, τῷ θεῷ is an instrumental dative, although ἐν normally precedes this dative when reference is made to a personal agent (Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 679). Paul’s primary comparison consists of fleshly weapons vs. divine weapons, source and creation, not only use.

2.3 The Significance of the Military Imagery

53

spiritual realm so that he could be in the one and act according to the other. Such confluence of the two aeons is only possible on the basis of apocalyptic assumptions. These assumptions are more than just implicit in II Cor. 10:1–6, for the theme of the entire passage is the eschatological campaign to bring every stronghold and high fortress opposing the gospel into submission to Christ. The overthrow of every enemy by the “divinely powerful weapons” is here described in military terms drawn from the apocalyptic vision of the final struggle between good and evil in the last days…. Therefore the word “flesh” as Paul uses it in II Cor. 10:3–4 is at one and the same time the weak material of which Paul’s body was composed and the old aeon whose human standard of conduct Paul refused to follow.21

Jewett rightly observes the distinction Paul makes between ἐν σαρκί and κατὰ σάρκα in the opening verses of chapter 10.22 He also notes correctly that “flesh” points to both the material body and the old age. In addition, underlying Paul’s argument of the inadequacy of the flesh is the recognition of a cosmic struggle, one in which humans participate but also in which human weapons are insufficient. Jewett regards this conflict as eschatological, referring to the “final struggle between good and evil.” For Paul, the final struggle is now underway and he participates in it, realizing that it will be consummated at the end of time (1 Cor 15:24–28). The discussion thus far indicates that although Paul recognizes that he lives ἐν σαρκί, he maintains that living ἐν σαρκί does not mandate how he lives. Paul uses the term “flesh” to denote his body and a pattern of life lived according to the old age’s way of being. Important to note is that Paul does not depict the flesh as evil or wicked, just inadequate for the present battle.23 Paul’s distinction between ἐν σαρκί and κατὰ σάρκα reveals his recognition that although human beings participate in this cosmic conflict, it is a conflict that extends beyond the human realm. Hence, Paul begins to put in place part of his binary framework: human (σαρκικός)/suprahuman (δυνατὰ τῷ θεῷ). The apostle’s statement “the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly but mighty through God” emphasizes the intersection of divine action and human action. Paul plays an active role in the war, but only God makes his weapons efficacious.24 Although Paul neglects to list weapons he does focus upon the weapons’ purpose and

21 Robert Jewett, Paul’s Anthropological Terms: A Study of Their Use in Conflict Settings (Leiden: Brill, 1971), 129–130. 22 For a different view consult Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:607–608. 23 Jewett, Paul’s Anthropological Terms, observes weakness as important to Paul’s characterization of the flesh. He writes, “‘Fleshly’ can be used as the opposite of ‘powerful’ only if it bears the connotation of ‘weakness.’ The definition of ‘flesh’ in terms of the weakness is reflected through the letter. Paul is being charged with making a weak physical appearance and possessing a despicable rhetorical capacity (II Cor. 10:10; 11:6), with being too weak to demand apostolic wages (II Cor. 11:7ff.)” (127–128). 24 In Section 2.5 an examination of the War Scroll will reveal a similar outlook.

54

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

ability – they are used for the destruction (καθαιροῦντες) of strongholds and reasonings or arguments (λογισµούς).25 The charge against Paul in 10:2 assumes that living κατὰ σάρκα is negative. In 10:3, he argues that living ἐν σαρκί does not mean that one wages a war campaign according to the flesh, thereby asserting that the flesh does not have to dictate one’s actions. Paul states, “I am human but I do not engage in warfare according to human ways or principles.” One would expect Paul to say that he lives according to the spirit, but here he does not include the opposite formulation to κατὰ σάρκα, κατὰ πνεῦµα, as he does in Galatians and Romans (Gal 4:29; Rom 8:4, 5, 13). Instead, he simply supplies a denial of the allegation.26 The apostle does not speak about living or walking according to the Spirit at all. Rather, he immediately introduces the notion of conflict and asserts that his weapons are empowered by God. Thus, he summarily dismisses the charge against him and immediately shifts the Corinthians’ focus to the cosmic contest underway. Paul’s final use of the phrase κατὰ σάρκα in 2 Corinthians 10–13 appears in 11:22 where he believes that the super-apostles are boasting according to the flesh. They boast about being Hebrews, Israelites, and descendants of Abraham. The context suggests that Paul’s opponents bragged about these identity markers, and Paul piles them up, taking them head-on. He asserts that such markers do not mean that his opponents qualify as servants (διάκονοι) of Christ (11:21–23).27 In fact, Paul delineates what it means to be a διάκονος, “servant,” of God in 11:23ff. 28 It entails labors, imprisonments, beatings, and frequently being near death (11:24ff; cf. 4:10). Paul’s depiction of himself as a true διάκονος of the Christ who suffers contrasts sharply with his opponents’ behavior. They in turn enslave, devour, take advantage of others, exalt themselves,

25

Williams, Paul’s Metaphors, noting also that Paul does not list his weapons, asserts that “all of his ‘weapons’ are comprehendend in one, namely, the gospel of Christ. The ‘strongholds’ (v.4) and the ‘obstacles’ (v. 5, lit., ‘every high thing lifted up,’ like the walls of a citadel) are the arguments by which the gospel of Christ is resisted. But the gospel can overcome even ‘the cleverness of the clever’” (216). 26 Perhaps, an appropriate opposite formulation in this instance would be κατὰ θέον, which is what Paul implies here. “I do not wage war according to the flesh but I wage war according to God, the one who empowers my weapons.” 27 The phrase κατὰ σάρκα also appears in 1 Cor 1:26 (βλέπετε γὰρ τὴν κλῆσιν ὑµῶν, ἀδελφοί, ὃτι οὐ πολλοὶ σοφοὶ κατὰ σάρκα, οὐ πολλοὶ δυνατοὶ, οὐ πολλοὶ εὐγενεῖς) and 10:18 (βλέπετε τὸν Ἰσραὴλ κατὰ σάρκα). In 1:26, the phrase refers to being wise according to human or worldly standards of wisdom, and in 10:18 it refers to the physical people of Israel. These two instances correspond with Paul’s usage of the phrase in 2 Corinthians –human standards and physical lineage. 28 See also Murray J. Harris, “2 Corinthians,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976), 10:390.

2.3 The Significance of the Military Imagery

55

and slap people in the face (11:20).29 Instead of suffering for Christ, they inflict suffering upon others. In these verses, Paul provides the Corinthians with two starkly contrasting images of servanthood. The phrase κατὰ σάρκα also appears in earlier parts of the letter, and these occurrences shed light on how the apostle utilizes the expression in the latter sections. The accusation that Paul lives κατὰ σάρκα (10:2) is not new but echoes a similar attack found in 2 Corinthians 1:17. In this verse, some Corinthians charge him with inconsistency because he changed his mind about visiting them. However, he insists that he does not make plans according to the flesh or by human standards. In 1:17, κατὰ σάρκα entails an inconsistency of character that leads one to say yes and no at the same time. The apostle rejects the notion that he acts in this way by stating in 1:18 that his word to the Corinthians has not been yes and no, for he is not vacillating or unreliable as one who lives according to the flesh would be. Rather, he is firm (βεβαιῶν) because he has been sealed (σφραγισάµενος) by God. In 10:3 Paul continues to argue against those who not only think he makes plans according to the flesh (1:17) but that he also lives his entire life according to the flesh.30 Along with rejecting the notion that he makes plans according to the flesh, the apostle maintains in 5:16 that he no longer knows or perceives κατὰ

29 According to Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, the phrase εἰς πρόσωπον ὑµᾶς δέρει refers to the cheek and represents a practice in which a slap to the cheek was a means of humiliating a person. Although he believes a figurative sense is possible in that Paul speaks about intense verbal attacks, he also rightly, I think, argues that a literal sense cannot be totally disregarded since “(1) religious authorities sometimes expressed their strong disapproval of what seemed to them to be flagrant verbal disrespect by striking the offender or ordering him struck (John 18:22; Acts 23:2) … [and] (2) religious leaders were prone to be attempted to assert their authority by bullying their subordinates” (786). 30 Morna D. Hooker, “From God’s Faithfulness to Ours: Another Look at 2 Corinthians 1:17–24,” in Paul and the Corinthians: Studies on a Community in Conflict: Essays in Honor of Margaret Thrall, eds. Trevor J. Burke and J. Keith Elliot, NovTSup 109 (Leiden: Brill, 2003), maintains that Paul’s objection to this charge arises from his belief that his faithfulness is grounded in God’s own faithfulness and therefore nullifies any accusation of vacillation. She writes, “Paul’s defence against the accusation that he is fickle is that he cannot be, since God himself is not fickle. If he shares in God’s faithfulness, it is because he, like all Christians, has been transferred ‘into Christ’ and now lives in him. It is through Christ that he shares the faithfulness of God, and it is in Christ that he ‘stands firm in faith,’ trusting in God to confirm him…. The phrase faith of Christ refers primarily to the faithfulness of Christ – the embodiment of God’s own faithfulness – and consequently, to the faith or faithfulness of those who are ‘in Christ’ as well” (239). Paul’s defense in this passage against vacillation is based on an appeal to God’s faithfulness, which is embodied in Christ. The apostle’s logic is that he is reliable because God is reliable. Again Hooker: “He is not guilty of vacillating – of faithlessness – because he shares in the faithfulness of God himself; and he shares in that faithfulness by his incorporation into Christ, who is the embodiment of God’s faithfulness” (233).

56

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

σάρκα.31 He proceeds to write that even though he may at one time have known Christ κατὰ σάρκα, now he no longer knows in this way. 32 Here Paul does not highlight Christ’s human existence in order to say that he once knew Christ in human form and now he no longer only knows him in that manner. Instead, Paul refers to two ways of knowing – knowing κατὰ σάρκα, which is the old age way of knowing, and knowing οὐ κατὰ σάρκα, which is the way of knowing that is characteristic of the “turn of the ages.” 33 According to Paul, the fact that Christ died for all and was raised (5:15) leads to the recognition (ὥστε) that there must be a new way of knowing ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν. The Christ event shatters how one once knew and perceived the world. 34 The temporal clauses which Paul utilizes in this section – ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν, ἀλλὰ νῦν οὐκέτι –emphasize the before/after quality of Paul’s thinking. 35 Before the Christ event, one did perceive or know the world through a fleshly means. But after Christ, another way of knowing becomes possible. This different way of knowing, as J. Louis Martyn notes, “is not that of the new age – this point must be emphasized – but rather the way of knowing which is granted at the juncture of the ages…. [Paul] does not live entirely in the new age, but rather at the painful and glorious juncture where some are being saved and some are perishing.”36 Martyn’s statement that

31 J. Louis Martyn, “Epistemology at the Turn of the Ages,” in Theological Issues in the Letters of Paul (Nashville: Abingdon, 1997), 106–110. 32 For the subsequent discussion of these verses I am indebted to Martyn’s analysis in “Epistemology at the Turn of the Ages.” 33 Ibid., 95. I follow Martyn, “Epistemology,” in seeing κατὰ σάρκα as adverbial, not adjectival. The following comments are helpful for the present discussion: “Paul is not speaking about a ‘fleshly Christ.’ He is certainly not saying that he was acquainted with Jesus prior to the crucifixion. Nor is he considering in the first instance ‘how a person should be understood and regarded.’ He is saying that there are two ways of knowing, and that what separates the two is the turn of the ages, the apocalyptic event of Christ’s death/resurrection. There is a way of knowing which is characteristic of the old age. In the past Paul himself knew in that way. And, since Paul now knows Christ (Phil 3:8), there must be a new way of knowing that is proper either to the new age or to that point at which the ages meet” (95, emphasis his). And again he writes, “[Paul] mounts these arguments in a way which makes clear that only at that juncture is a person granted the new means of perception which enable one to distinguish true from false apostles. To put it in the prosaic language of scholarly investigation, Paul’s statements establish an inextricable connexion between eschatology and epistemology” (92). 34 Ibid., 95. Jewett, Paul’s Anthropological Terms, asserts “This means that Paul is not denying the relevance of the historical Jesus but rather is rejecting the judgment of Jesus or any other person according to fleshly human standards…. To judge according to the flesh is thus to be impressed by existence characterized by ‘life’ rather than by ‘death’ (II Cor 5:14)” (126–127). 35 Martyn, “Epistemology,” 94. 36 Ibid., 107–8. Emphasis mine. The issue of some being saved and some perishing is addressed below in 2.4.1. Cf. 1 Cor 10:11.

2.3 The Significance of the Military Imagery

57

Paul stands at the juncture of the ages provides helpful insight into Paul’s depiction of himself as one who participates in a cosmic battle with eternal implications (10:3–6). The painful nature of the battle is emphasized in Paul’s distress over the Corinthian situation. He is extremely burdened by his concern for the churches, and he is heated in his response to those who mislead and deceive believers, causing them to stumble (11:3, 13–15, 28–29). Paul’s reference to two ways of knowing parallels his two ways of waging war in 10:3–6 – one wages war according to the flesh, and one wages war according to divine power. Just as Paul no longer knows according to the flesh or human standards, so he also does not wage war according to human methods. Just as he views fleshly weapons as inadequate, so he believes knowing according to the flesh is inadequate as well. Along with his use of martial imagery in 10:3–6 to point to a cosmic conflict, Paul uses language here to refer to a way of knowing that points to a realm beyond flesh. According to Paul, this new way of perceiving and understanding brought about through the Christ event leads to the perception of oneself as a new creation in Christ (καινὴ κτίσις; 2 Cor 5:17). His language of καινὴ κτίσις alludes to the Genesis creation account and suggests that he views Christ’s death and resurrection as bringing about a new Genesis in the world. 37 Even his language of behold ἰδού (5:17c) invites the Corinthians to participate in this new way of seeing the world – they are to see that new things have come.38 Although the apostle’s language emphasizes knowledge and perception in 2 Corinthians 5:16, the Christ event for him is not only about a new way of knowing. For him, a fundamental change has occurred in the world. The one who knew no sin became sin, and those who have only known sin can now become righteous. This divine interchange takes place because the immortal has become mortal.39 Paul’s speech underscores the transformative nature of the 37 Isaiah 65:17–25 and 66:22–24 may also be in the background here. I am indebted to Loren Stuckenbruck for proposing these possibilities. A connection to Isaiah is particularly suggestive in light of God’s promise to create new heavens and a new earth (Is 43:18–21). Cf. also Jub 5:9–12 where God grants human beings a new nature. 38 Cf. also Martyn, “Epistemology,” 93–94. Edward Adams, Constructing the World: A Study in Paul’s Cosmological Language (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000), outlines the options in scholarly debate for understanding the phrase καινὴ κτίσις: “Does it refer to the individual convert (as the microcosm of the ‘eschatological macrocosm of the new heaven and the new earth’), the believing community or the new cosmic order?” (234). He prefers the view that Paul uses the expression regarding the “new or renewed created order” (235). Nevertheless, he also understands that “the proposition expressed by the sentence as a whole embraces the individual and the community…. Though the final eschatological event lies in the future, for Christians, in some partial and non-material way, the old things have already passed away, and new things have already come…. The underlying thought is that Christ’s death and resurrection has in some way set in motion the change of the ages” (235; emphasis his). 39 For the notion of interchange see Morna D. Hooker, “Interchange in Christ and Ethics” JSNT 25 (1985): 3–17; “Interchange in Christ,” JTS 21 (1971): 349–361.

58

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

Christ event, for Christ’s death and resurrection brings about a reconciliation of the world to God as well as a different way of seeing and understanding. Paul’s words, along with evoking the Genesis creation story and espousing a new way of knowing, emphasize that any type of knowledge based on outward, physical appearance is inadequate.40 Paul says as much in 5:12 when he criticizes those who boast in outward appearance and not in the heart. Hence, 5:12 anticipates his statements in 10:1–10 in which how one appears does not tell the entire story. Paul behaves in a lowly manner (10:1), and even appears weak physically (10:10), but can still wield divine weapons. The Christ event reveals that a fundamental rupture has occurred in the cosmos, creating the need for the world’s reconciliation with God. While Paul does not elaborate in chapter 5 on how this rupture took place (cf. 11:1–4), he does nevertheless highlight God as the one who acts to heal the rupture. God brings healing through Christ and reconciles the world to God’s self.41 This understanding for Paul comes about as a result of Christ’s death and resurrection, an event that makes knowing κατὰ σάρκα inadequate. For Paul, how one understands the world invariably shifts in Christ, no longer entailing a merely human epistemology. 42 Up to this point, the examination has moved from the connotation of κατὰ σάρκα as unstable or indecisive in chapter 1, to κατὰ σάρκα as a way of perceiving or knowing the world in chapter 5, 43 to an idea of κατὰ σάρκα as human

40 Paul’s criticism of those who boast in outward appearance may also point forward to the charge that Paul’s bodily presence is weak (10:10). Perhaps Paul wants his readers to grasp that knowledge based on what one sees in the physical body is insufficient, which corresponds to his other statements in 10:1–2. 41 According to Stanley E. Porter, “Reconciliation and 2 Cor 5:18–21” in The Corinthian Correspondence, ed. R. Bieringer (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1996), “Paul uses καταλλάσσω in a way not found in previous Greek usage. He is the first extant author to use the active voice form of the verb with the offended and hence angered party in a relationship (i.e. God) as (grammatical) subject taking the initiative in effecting reconciliation between himself and the offending party, that is, humanity” (693). 42 As Martyn, “Epistemology,” observes, “The cross is the epistemological crisis for the simple reason that while it is in one sense followed by the resurrection, it is not replaced by the resurrection” (109). Although Paul does not mention the cross in chapters 10–12, he does write in 13:4 that Christ was crucified in weakness and lives by the power of God. This reference suggests that the cross remains important to Paul’s theological argumentation in these chapters. Similarly, Gerald O’Collins, “Power Made Perfect in Weakness: 2 Cor 12:9– 10” CBQ 33 (1971) who contends, “The understanding of the crucifixion as the event in which Christ proved radically ‘weak’ forms the background to Paul’s whole discussion. In the case of the crucifixion and resurrection, weakness and power constitute an inseparable unity” (532). 43 When speaking of knowing κατὰ σάρκα, Martyn, “Epistemology,” states: “When Paul speaks of knowing kata sarka, he does not intend the term sarx to refer exclusively to the flesh of the knower. He intends it to point fundamentally to the realm of the old age” (108).

2.3 The Significance of the Military Imagery

59

attributes such as lineage, history, and status, in chapter 11. All of these occurrences of κατὰ σάρκα in 2 Corinthians indicate that Paul constructs an ongoing depiction for his hearers. This portrayal demonstrates that he does not live according to the flesh in any way: He does not plan or make decisions, perceive the world, or view his own life according to the flesh. Paul’s logic is that if he no longer does any of these things κατὰ σάρκα, although he lives ἐν σαρκί, he does not wage war κατὰ σάρκα either. These earlier references (1:17–18; 5:12– 17) anticipate Paul’s later statements in 10:2 and 11:22. With all of these declarations, Paul makes a case for himself to the Corinthians that living ἐν σαρκί does not define his existence. Bodily and fleshly existence is not the sum total of reality.44 In fact, the inadequacy of the fleshly realm becomes apparent when one realizes that it is insufficient for the war that engages believers, and indeed, all of humanity. The cosmic nature of the conflict precludes the utilization of human arms. The foregoing discussion has centered around Paul’s use of κατὰ σάρκα in chapters 10–13 and other parts of 2 Corinthians and has sought to connect these usages with how Paul employs this phrase in the context of martial language in 10:3. The investigation will now turn to a more in-depth discussion of the apostle’s military terminology. 2.3.2 Paul’s Military Language in 10–13 Paul believes that he engages in a cosmic conflict and employs a variety of military terms throughout chapters 10–13 to emphasize this reality. The warfare imagery in chapter 10 persists in the passages that follow, albeit not to the same degree as in 10:3–6. Nonetheless, the presence of military terms in the rest of the letter suggests that the cosmic battle he foregrounds in the opening verses remains a significant underlying theme. In the initial verses of chapter 10 one encounters a repository of a number of well-known military terms: στρατεύω: wage war (10:3); ὅπλα: weapons (10:4); στρατεία: warfare (10:4); ὀχύρωµα: stronghold (10:4); ὕψωµα: rampart, raised fortification (10:5)45; αἰχµαλωτίζω: capture (10:5); ἐν ἑτοίµω ἔχοντες: Martyn’s observation holds for the present analysis since Paul uses this phrase in 2 Corinthians to denote being unstable in decision making (1:17) and to refer to one’s ethnic and religious heritage (11:18). Thus, κατὰ σάρκα for Paul is about more than a person’s body but also about the old-age way of thinking and being in which flesh entails instability, human perception, and placing emphasis on human genealogy. Paul’s statement, then, about not waging war according to the flesh in 10:3 entails not waging war according to human ways of thinking, being, and doing. 44 Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:607. 45 Although I have included ὕψωµα among the list of military terms, it is debated whether or not it is part of Paul’s military imagery or whether it is an interpretation of ὀχύρωµα. Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, cites John Chrysostom who believed the military imagery persists and that the word is synonymous with πύργωµα, meaning “fenced city” or “that which is furnished with towers” (2:612). Thrall opts for a “non-metaphorical sense for

60

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

being ready, standing ready (10:6).46 Paul contends that he does not wage war according to the flesh, for his weapons are not fleshly but mighty in God (10:4). His language points to a realm beyond the human sphere, while simultaneously highlighting divine and human agency, for it is God’s power, not human power, that triumphs. Whereas a majority of these words appear only in these opening verses, the last phrase, ἐν ἑτοίµω ἔχοντες, reappears in chapter 12. The expression refers to military preparation, and in this instance, Paul uses it to discuss his actions at his future visit. The phrase indicates Paul’s readiness to use his divine weapons to secure the Corinthians’ obedience and to defeat his opponents (10:6). In 12:14 (ἑτοίµως ἔχω), Paul assures his audience of his intention to remain militarily prepared to stand his ground in not accepting payment from the Corinthians and to deal with those who have sinned (12:14–15, 20–21; 13:1–3). Thus, Paul continues to utilize battle language as he focuses the Corinthians on his impending arrival. The use of warfare terms to refer to his future visit occurs also in 13:2 with the term φείδοµαι. φείδοµαι can refer to sparing persons or things in war. Here again, Paul paints a picture of his future meeting with the Corinthians by utilizing the military language he emphasized in the opening verses of chapter 10. Paul’s bold declaration that he will not spare anyone suggests that he wants to give his audience proof that Christ speaks through him (13:3). His promise to spare no one echoes the sharp tenor of πᾶς in 10:5–6, in which Paul declares that his weapons destroy every high entity, capture every mind, and punish every disobedience. In 13:2, with the use of φείδοµαι, Paul reaffirms the totality of his mission in that no one will be spared.47 In addition to all of these phrases, Paul applies other vocabulary from the military arena in chapter 11. In 11:8, Paul uses the word ὀψώνιον to refer to the support he received from other churches. This word can simply denote wages or payment, but it can also refer to the pay soldiers receive or a soldier’s rations, which is how he employs this term in 1 Corinthians 9:7 when he writes, “Who at any time pays the expenses for doing military service?” (NRSV). Since Paul portrays himself as a soldier fighting in God’s army, it follows that he understands his mission to the churches as part of this divine responsibility, and it ὕψωµα, and the whole phrase will mean ‘every arrogant attitude raised in opposition’” (2:613). View also the discussion of this term in Abraham Malherbe, “Antisthenes and Odysseus, and Paul at War,” HTR 76 (1983), 144–145. I discuss in fuller detail below what I think Paul refers to when he uses this expression. 46 Brink, “A General’s Exhortation to His Troops,” extends the presence of military language to v. 11, writing that “Paul is patterning his remarks after a general’s exhortation to the troops, a purposeful military metaphor, designed to affirm his authority as general in Christ’s army with the Corinthians as faithful fellow-soldiers” (193). 47 Paul uses φείδοµαι in 12:6 but the context there does not suggest a military connotation. Other uses of φείδοµαι include Herodotus 1.80.19; Onasander, The General, 6.12; Polybius, Histories, 20.5.9; Josephus, BJ, 1.352, 4.82; AJ, 14.480, 18.359.

2.3 The Significance of the Military Imagery

61

would not be unusual to characterize the payment received from churches in this manner.48 He regards himself as fighting on God’s behalf and for God’s congregations. Therefore, just as a soldier receives rations (ὀψώνιον), so would he.49 The plausibility of viewing ὀψώνιον as a military term rises when one recognizes that Paul uses this term in 11:8 and a few verses later employs two additional words, ἐκκόπτω and ἀφορµή (11:12), which can refer to armed conflict. Ἐκκόπτω is a military expression meaning “to beat off or to cut off,” whereas ἀφορµή denotes a base of operations.50 The apostle declares that he 48 Paul Barnett, (The Second Epistle to the Corinthians. NICNT [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997]) raises the possibility that ὀψώνιον may continue the military image commenced with στρατεύω in 10:3 (515n18). Ralph P. Martin (2 Corinthians, WBC 40 [Waco: Word, 1985]) also notes the martial imagery of ὀψώνιον in 11:8. For him it is a continuation of the military term ἐσύλησα. That verb is used in classical Greek to describe stripping away the armor of a dead soldier on the battlefield (346). 49 The reason for Paul’s refusal to accept payment from the Corinthians is a subject of much discussion. But as Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, notes, it seems that Paul’s method was not to accept payment from congregations while he served them (765). He relied on support from other congregations from which he had moved on. If this is true, such a policy caused no little angst among the Corinthians who wanted to support Paul while he was with them. They were utterly hurt and disappointed by his refusal to allow them to do so. Some scholars believe that the false apostles used Paul’s refusal against him – a real apostle would accept remunerations (11:7–11; 12:13–18). This is also the basic view of Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:682–4. Martin, 2 Corinthians, also discusses this view but adds that not only did Paul accept money from congregations once he left them, but he also only accepted money from congregations with which he had a “cordial relationship” (345). He argues that two additional elements form the background of Paul’s situation. First, sophists believed receiving money for teaching was the right thing to do since free teaching showed its worthlessness. Second, the Corinthians may have viewed Paul supporting himself as a tentmaker as an indicator of low social status. They believed that no “free citizen – certainly no philosopher – should get himself entangled in physical work, except under extreme pressure” (344). According to Martin, Paul’s opponents may have subscribed to these views. As a result of all of this, Martin concludes, “The Corinthians, abetted by the rival missionaries, had objected that Paul’s behavior was inconsistent: it betrayed a further example of vacillation and double-dealing…; it showed favoritism and a lack of love for them…; and it made his raising of the Jerusalem collection a dubious enterprise, since it could be seen now as a roundabout and underhanded way of claiming status as an apostle” (345). Udo Schnelle, “Der 2. Korintherbrief und die Mission gegen Paulus” in Der Zweite Korintherbrief: Literarische Gestalt - historische Situation - theologische Argumentation. Festschrift zum 70. Geburtstag von Dietrich-Alex Koch, ed. Dieter Sänger, FRLANT 250 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2012) emphasizes Paul’s refusal of remuneration as an instance of his theological independence and witness. He writes, “Sein Verzicht auf materielle Unterstützung durch die Korinther … sichert seine eigene theologische Unabhängigkeit … und demonstriert seine theologischen Maßstäbe: Gottes Kraft ist in den Schwachen mächtig” (316). 50 ἐκκόπτω: Xenophon, Hell. 7.4.26; Diodorus Siculus, Bibliotheca Historia 14.115.6; Plutarch, Caes. 26.2.11; ἀφορµή: Polybius, Histories, 3.69.8–13; Philo, Flaccus 47;

62

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

will continue his present practice in order to “cut off the opportunity” of those who want to be considered his equals. Such expressions illustrate that Paul frames his decision not to accept payment in military language. He denies his opponents the right to continue to operate.51 This terminology also suggests that Paul likens his opponents to soldiers who have attempted to set up a base of operations among the Corinthians, and the apostle views his action as impeding his rivals.52 The characterization of his opponents as setting up a base of operations and his act of denying them this opportunity provides another glimpse into the cosmic war that Paul describes in chapter 10. He and his adversaries, the super-apostles, are locked in battle.53 In 11:13–15 Paul provides the reasons why he wishes to cut off his opponents’ opportunity: they are actually false apostles, deceitful workers who disguise themselves as apostles of Christ (cf. 2:17). Just as Paul linked military language in chapter 10 with the suprahuman realm (δυνατὰ τῷ θεῷ), here again the apostle connects his warfare imagery with the cosmic realm. God empowers his weapons and Satan precipitates the false apostles’ disguise. Paul’s act of cutting off the super-apostles’ base of operations among the Corinthians becomes a step in reclaiming the minds of the Corinthians who have been deceived (11:3).54 The combination of all of these terms linked with how Paul begins this section of the letter strongly suggests that Paul’s theme of cosmic combat remains an underlying motif throughout 2 Corinthians 10–13. Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Ant. Rom. 6.25.3; Onasander, The General, 42.15; Cassius Dio, Historia Romana 37.52.3. 51 So also Barnett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, “Apparently Paul is asserting that he will continue to decline payment in order to cut the ground under those (intruders) who seek to stand as equals with him in ministry” (521). 52 Barnett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, also notes that ἀφορµή is a military term for a base from which to launch a military operation (515n18). Ironically, Paul takes the attack of not accepting remunerations levied against him by the false apostles and the Corinthians and turns it on its head. They perceive this action as demonstrating Paul’s inferior status and his lack of love for them (11:7–11; 12:13–18), whereas Paul states that this action discloses the very opposite. It reveals that he knows what is really going on. The gospel should not be reduced to a peddler’s ware for sale (2:17), for he recognizes the true value of the gospel and would not do anything to impede its progress. Real apostles do not peddle God’s word and, consequently, do not behave like the false apostles (11:19–21; cf. 2:17–3:3). Thus, he maintains it is not about him not loving the Corinthians but about him being controlled by the love of Christ (5:14). 53 That Paul characterizes the opponents as setting up a “base of operations” coheres with his statements in 10:13–16 in which he castigates the false apostles for intruding into his territory. They have attempted to set up camp in the field assigned by God to Paul. For a discussion of ἀφορµή, ἐκκόπτω, φείδοµαι, and other martial terms in Romans see Beverly Roberts Gaventa, “The Rhetoric of Violence and the God of Peace in Paul’s Letter to the Romans,” (Paul, John, and Apocalyptic Eschatology: Studies in Honour of Martinus C. de Boer, eds. Jan Krans et al. [Leiden: Brill, 2013], 61–75. 54 See discussion on the mind below in 2.4.

2.3 The Significance of the Military Imagery

63

Paul’s depiction of himself as engaged in military action continues in his peristasis catalogs in 11:23–28. These hardships can be regarded as adversities encountered during military combat as indicated in sources that depict the training, the trials, and the tribulations of generals and soldiers. The following texts describe difficulties experienced during battle which correspond to Paul’s own language about his sufferings. For example, in The War with Jugurtha, Gaius Marius gives a speech juxtaposing those who have prestigious lineages and backgrounds and lead “soft” lives with someone like himself who does not have such a noble background. In contrast, he knows the hardships of life and of battle, which make him more suitable for leading soldiers into combat. I cannot, to justify your confidence, display family portraits or the triumphs and consulships of my forefathers; but if occasion requires, I can show spears, a banner, trappings, and other military prizes, as well as scars on my breast. These are my portraits, these my patent of nobility, not left me by inheritance as theirs were, but won by my own innumerable efforts and perils.55

And again he says: But I have learned by far the most important lesson for my country’s good – to strike down the foe, to keep watch and ward, to fear nothing save ill repute, to endure heat and cold alike, to sleep on the ground, to bear privation and fatigue at the same time. It is with these lessons that I shall encourage my soldiers.56

In these quotes, similarities exist between Paul’s own description of his trials at the end of chapter 11, such as the endurance of heat and cold. Also, Marius’ reference to his scars from battle parallels Paul’s own scars from the beatings he lists in 11:23–25.57 Although Paul does not speak explicitly about the scars that the beatings left upon his body, he does mention his wounds in Galatians (6:17). Martyn, in his discussion in Galatians of Paul’s stigmata, compares them with the scars upon Antipater whose marks from battle demonstrated his loyalty to Caesar.58 In the same way, Martyn argues, Paul’s marks illustrate that he belongs to Christ. 59 To be sure, Paul does not use the term stigmata in 2 Corinthians, but by listing beatings as one of his hardships, he suggests that he views these floggings as part of his endurance as a soldier. This interpretation is made all the more viable when viewed against the background of the 55 Sallust, Bell. Jug. 85.29–30 (Rolfe, LCL). Also cited by Jennifer A. Glancy, “Boasting of Beatings (2 Corinthians 11:23–25),” JBL 123 (2004): 104. 56 Sallust, Bell. Jug. 85.33–34 (Rolfe, LCL). 57 I am indebted to Glancy (“Boasting of Beatings”) and J. Louis Martyn (Galatians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AB 33A [New York: Doubleday, 1997], 568–569) for this discussion. 58 Josephus (BJ 1.193) writes, “Showing himself on all occasions the most daring of fighters, and constantly wounded, [Antipater] bore the marks of his valor on almost every part of his body” (Thackeray, LCL; adapted translation). 59 Martyn, Galatians, 568n73; cf. also discussion below.

64

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

military terms elsewhere in these chapters. A speech by Alexander as found in Arrian further reveals the warrior’s life: But, you may say, the toils and hardships were yours and all these acquisitions were mine, while I direct you without any personal toil or hardship! Yet which of you is conscious that he exerted himself more in my behalf than I in his? Come then, let any of you strip and display his own wounds, and I will display mine in turn; in my case there is no part of the body, or none in front, that has been left unwounded, and there is no weapon of close combat, no missile whose scars I do not bear on my body, but I have been wounded by the sword hand to hand, shot by arrows and struck by a catapult, and I am often struck by stones, and clubs on your behalf, and for your glory and your riches, while I lead you as conquerors through every land and sea, river, mountain, and plain.60

This display of wounds of which Alexander speaks signifies his commitment and dedication as well as his bravery. He remarks that his entire body filled with scars and wounds exemplifies his military service and his responsibility to those he leads. One can surmise from his words that he believes these hardships are essential for a commander of troops who endures such adversity for the sake of those he commands. His ultimate goal is to lead his troops as conquerors through the battles. In his training manual for generals, Onasander gives advice on preparing soldiers for war. He advises generals to engage the soldiers in mock combats with each other. This type of training prepares them for battle. For the hunger and thirst derived from toil are a sufficient relish and a sweet draught, and muscles become harder and untiring; and trained by sweating, puffing, and panting, and exposed to summer heat and the bitter cold under the open sky, the soldiers become accustomed to future hardships.61

Here Onasander’s words illustrate that hunger, thirst, and exposure to heat and cold are difficulties soldiers endure. Paul mentions analogous hardships in his peristasis catalog. These accounts of danger, in which soldiers suffer from stoning, heat and cold, thirst and hunger, bodily fatigue, and adversity, parallel Paul’s own report of his hardships and suggest that Paul characterizes himself as a commander who endures difficulties as he engages in warfare. The adversities he faces are hardships fundamental to one who engages in a divine campaign alongside God

60 Adapted translation of Arrian, Anab. 7.10.1–2. Cited also by Glancy, “Boasting of Beatings,” 122. 61 Onasander, The General 10.5 (Illinois Greek Club, LCL). Onasander also makes an interesting statement about a characteristic of a general in 1.4, which is somewhat akin to Paul’s reference to his sleepless nights in 2 Cor 11:27. Onasander writes that a general must be “vigilant, that he may spend wakeful nights over the most important projects; for at night, as a rule, with the mind at rest, the general perfects his plans.”

2.3 The Significance of the Military Imagery

65

(10:3–6): As God’s διάκονος he endures sufferings.62 Just as the excerpt from Alexander includes his concern for those in his audience, Paul incorporates near the end of his adversity list his own anxiety for all those he believes he bears responsibility. Moreover, the marks that Alexander bears upon his body as evidence of his combat provide a similar context for Paul, whose own marks display evidence of his combat. His body bears the tangible scars that signify what it means to proclaim the true Jesus, not the different Jesus heralded by his opponents (11:4). Paul’s experiences showcase the reality of having one’s body enlisted in the army of God (cf. 2:14–17). However, would the Corinthians have perceived his scars as those of a warrior? Or would they have viewed his endurance of beatings as an indication of humiliation and servility? 63 In light of all the warfare imagery examined so far, if we were to take a seat among the Corinthian congregations during the reading of this letter,64 the audience would hear the similarities between Paul’s list of hardships and the obstacles faced by those in combat. The extensive warfare imagery that begins chapter 10, along with the military vocabulary that appears up to this point in the letter strongly suggests such a possibility. Although Paul describes this cosmic conflict with the language of human warfare, the supernatural nature of the war inevitably alters the contours of the battle. For example, Paul’s wounds derive from floggings and reflect Christ’s own marks, illustrating that in Paul’s very body the gospel becomes “in-fleshed.”65 The marks he bears upon his body and the fact that he has been beaten may have been viewed as humiliating by some of the Corinthians and even by his opponents. 66 However, for Paul, they reflect the humiliating marks of his Christ, marks that he received in hostile territory.67 Hence, the marks Paul receives from persecution and from enduring adversities for the sake of the gospel become his

62

For a different perspective see John T. Fitzgerald, Cracks in an Earthen Vessel: An Examination of the Catalogues of Hardships in the Corinthian Correspondence, SBLDS 99 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988). 63 These provocative questions are raised by Glancy in her insightful article “Boasting of Beatings.” Although our conclusions on this matter differ, with her opting for the latter view, she does, nevertheless, acknowledge that “one could argue that martial imagery remains implicit in Paul’s recitation of hardships in 11:23–33, so that the list functions as an overview of adversities Paul has confronted on military campaigns for Christ” (135). This, indeed, is the argument of the present study. 64 Here I follow Martyn, Galatians, who challenges the readers of his Galatians commentary to “take a seat in one of the Galatian congregations, in order – as far as possible –to listen to the letter with Galatian ears” (42). 65 For a fuller discussion of this read 2.8.5 below. 66 This view is also part of Glancy’s, “Boasting of Beatings,” argument. 67 The presence of these humiliating marks echoes Paul’s earlier urging of the Corinthians through the meekness and gentleness of Christ (10:1).

66

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

war wounds. 68 The apostle declares that the Christ event has intensified a cosmic war between God and Satan in which those who proclaim the gospel face severe opposition. Paul’s endurance of all of these adversities highlights God’s preservation of him in the midst of difficulties. God’s divine power empowers his weapons (10:3–6) and empowers him, enabling him to endure (cf. 4:7–12) such hardships. As discussed in 10:3–6, God’s power makes Paul’s weapons efficacious, so here too God’s power preserves him on the battlefield. What is more, realization of such divine preservation prompts Paul to ask, “Who is weak and am I not weak? (11:29).” These questions correspond with what comes before and with what follows. Paul recognizes the weak status of his body, which illustrates all the more that power belongs to God, not to him. He has no ability to preserve himself, rescue himself, or to bring about victory in this conflict. He again underscores his weakness in the next episode he relates to the Corinthian audience, his flight from Damascus. At the end of his peristasis catalog (11:23–31) Paul gives details about the situation in Damascus that caused him to flee for his life (11:32–33). Compared to the previous hardships he has listed, Paul gives considerably more information regarding this incident from his past. Scholars speculate about the reason for this elaboration. Some argue that the opponents have used this escape against him to point out his cowardice and his weakness. Consequently, Paul must address this situation and correct any false information that the opponents have given to the Corinthians. Two other perspectives on this event, which are not mutually exclusive, include viewing this episode as a counterbalance to what follows. For example, Barnett writes about this juxtaposition clearly. He states, “Being ‘lowered down’ in these verses symmetrically counterpoises his description of the man who was ‘caught up’ into the ‘third heaven.’”69 Others, like Harris, describe this situation as another example of Paul’s weakness. According to Harris: It is decidedly more satisfactory to regard this pericope as an instance of Paul’s weakness and humiliation (v. 30), and as a demonstration of God’s intervention (through Paul’s friends in Damascus) to preserve his chosen instrument (cf. Acts 9:15) from danger, that is, as an evidence of God’s or Christ’s power operating in the midst of human weakness (4:7; 12:9– 10)…. The episode, narrated here with remarkable economy of language, forms a striking literary backdrop for what follows: first, an embarrassing descent to escape the hands of men, then an exhilarating ascent into the presence of God (12:2–4).70 68 Although the following comments from Martyn, Galatians, were written about Paul’s στίγµατα in Galatians, his remarks pertain to this discussion as well. “These ‘Jesus scars’ reflect the wounds of a soldier sent into the front trenches of God’s redemptive and liberating war” (568). 69 Barnett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 553. Italics his. 70 Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 820–1; Matera, II Corinthians, 272; Furnish, II Corinthians, believes that “Paul himself offers [the story] here as further proof of his weakness…. It is a story about Paul’s humiliation” (541, 542).

2.3 The Significance of the Military Imagery

67

Lambrecht, on the other hand, believes that in recounting this event Paul boasts more about his miraculous liberation than about any type of humiliation.71 For Akira Satake, the Damascus incident reveals Paul’s powerlessness in a pronounced way. Satake writes, Der Bericht über das in Damaskus Erfahrene enthält damit ein viel deutlicheres Bekenntnis seiner Ohnmacht als der Peristasenkatalog. Paulus kann sich mit dieser Erfahrung nicht brüsten; auch die Leser werden von diesem Bericht keineswegs zum Preisen seiner Person veranlasst. In dieser Hinsicht hat der Bericht eine gewisse Affinität zu dem, was er in von seinen Stachelerfahrung in 12,7ff berichtet.72

These perspectives share one common feature: they notice some type of link to what follows in 12:1–10, whether it is an antithesis between lowering and ascending or the continuing themes of weakness, powerlessness, and humiliation. Paul’s account of his escape from Damascus coheres with his military résumé. The effectiveness of his weapons rests totally upon God’s power and not his own. Also, importantly, in the letter up to this point, Paul has highlighted opposition to God and to himself, a theme that continues into chapter 12. His experience in Damascus serves once more to draw attention to the opposition to the gospel of God and to him and to focus attention on God’s power in the presence of opposition. 73 The theme of preservation, which implicitly appears in the rest of the adversities he lists, occurs in the Damascus episode as well. Frank Matera views this incident as indicative of “when [Paul] was helpless, then God delivered him.”74 This observation by Matera makes sense in light of the context. Just as God preserved Paul in his beatings, his thirst, his hunger, and other adversities, God also takes care of him in the face of a threat from a human ruler. In relating this event, Paul emphasizes his Ohnmacht and God’s deliverance. This deliverance highlights what Paul has been declaring all along: his own status as one engaged in battle who overcomes through God’s power. Such an event, along with the hardships listed previously, illustrates to the Corinthians and to his opponents that no power, whether rulers on earth or

71

Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, 193. Akira Satake, “Schritt für Schritt: Die Argumentation des Paulus in 2Kor 10–13,” in Der Zweite Korintherbrief: Literarische Gestalt – historische Situation – theologische Argumentation. Festschrift zum 70. Geburtstag von Dietrich-Alex Koch, ed. Dieter Sänger, FRLANT 250 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2012), 289. In addition, Satake makes the interesting observation that the Corinthians, after hearing of Paul’s endurance of all the adversities in his peristasis catalog, may have hailed him as a hero. Thus, he includes the Damascus incident to prevent such a perception: “Aber es ist wie erwähnt u.U. möglich, dass sie als Zeichen seines heroenhaften Durchhaltens der Leiden angesehen werden. Beim Damaskusbericht ist diese Möglichkeit vollkommen ausgeschlossen” (289). 73 The theme of opposition is discussed in fuller detail in Chapter 3. 74 Matera, II Corinthians, 273. 72

68

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

gods of this world (4:4), can withstand the power of God.75 In this way, then, the episode anticipates the ascent account of chapter 12. In his use of martial language throughout these final chapters, Paul portrays himself as fighting alongside God and against Satan and demonic powers (11:4, 14–15; 12:7). He is standing ready, sparing no one, receiving a soldier’s rations, strategically cutting off the enemy’s attack, and enduring sufferings on the battlefield. In short, “Er hält sich kampfbereit.”76 At the end of the letter he calls upon the Corinthians to recognize that they also participate in this struggle and cosmic conflict. His appeal for them to recognize their participation in this conflict occurs in an explicit manner in chapter 13, where the apostle utilizes two related martial terms, the noun κατάρτισις in 13:9 and the verb καταρτίζω in 13:11. 77 Although the noun can mean “restoration” and the verb “to be restored,” in light of the extensive military terminology that precedes them, the warfare connotation cannot be altogether dismissed. The martial sense of these terms includes “training,” discipline,” “equipping,” and “preparation.” One can say that here Paul relates to the Corinthians his prayer for their restoration and he urges them to be restored. Yet in view of his vivid depiction of the existence of a cosmic battle in the previous verses, the apostle’s prayer for the Corinthians could also include a prayer for their preparation and training (13:9). The verb καταρτίζω can be construed as either middle or passive in voice (13:11). If it is passive, then it can be translated as “Be equipped (by God)” which correlates to 10:3–6, where the apostle speaks of his weapons being empowered by God. Here Paul informs his hearers that they too can experience divine assistance as they engage in the cosmic battle. If one takes καταρτίζω, however, as a middle, then the sense would be “Equip yourselves,” or “Prepare yourselves.” Prior to this point in the letter, Paul has already laid out carefully the existence of cosmic warfare before the Corinthians and now he urges them to get ready. The apostle prays that the Corinthians be restored to him and to the gospel he preaches and he prays for the discipline and training they will need as participants in the struggle. The semantic density of these terms is evidenced by Paul’s linguistic choice of words that befit both of these desires for his audience.78 75

Cf. Rom 8:38–9. Gräßer, Der Zweite Brief an die Korinther, 89. 77 Diodorus Siculus, Bibliotheca Historica, 12.84.2, 13.38.5, 13.70.2, 13.80.5, 13.97.1, 16.16.3, 19.61.5, 19.62.8; Polybius, Histories, 1.47.6, 3.95.2; Plutarch, Alex. 7.1; Herodotus, 9.66. 78 Both Brink, “A General’s Exhortation to His Troops,” 84, and Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, mention the “discipline,” “training,” and “preparation” connotations of κατάρτισις, καταρτίζω (927). Brink also especially highlights the possibility of martial overtones here. While Paul uses these terms in other letters (1 Thess 3:10; Gal 6:1; 1 Cor 1:10; Rom 9:22), the specific martial context of this letter suggests that here the military resonances should not be ignored. 76

2.3 The Significance of the Military Imagery

69

The combination of all of this martial imagery throughout 2 Corinthians 10– 13 suggests that Paul’s theme of cosmic combat remains an underlying motif throughout the last four chapters. Moreover, the apostle’s insistence that the Corinthians be equipped is a climactic imperative resulting from all of the imagery that has come before it. The Corinthians have been prepared for this imperative through the battle language of chapters 10–13. 2.3.3 Summary of Military Imagery This section of the study has established that the military language with which Paul begins chapter 10 continues throughout 10–13, a phenomenon that has not been sufficiently recognized in discussions of 2 Corinthians 12:1–10. The presence of additional warfare terms in the rest of the epistle illustrates that Paul does not leave this imagery behind after 10:6. Its continued presence signifies the importance of warfare imagery for him and for the portrait of cosmic warfare he outlines to his Corinthian audience. As has been demonstrated in this section (and will be discussed in the next), Paul blends this martial language with an apocalyptic/cosmic outlook to foreground his depiction of God’s war on behalf of humanity. Significantly, Paul uses the language of human warfare to describe a war that does not use human weapons. This struggle, although described in terms corresponding to human conflict and although involving human actors, goes beyond the human realm. Paul views the Corinthian situation through a military lens and thus frames the situation rhetorically in this way as well for his audience.79 This lens serves to accentuate the themes of opposition, divine power, and human weakness, as well as the cosmic nature of the war at hand. The weapons Paul uses to participate in this cosmic war, although not delineated by him, function through divine power and overcome all opposition to God. With this spiritual warfare background in mind, the discussion now turns specifically to the arena of this warfare, the mind and knowledge of God.

79

Gaventa, “The Rhetoric of Violence,” speaks about Paul’s use of military language in Romans. She asks what work this language is doing and what it reveals about Paul’s understanding of the world and God’s dealings with the world (69). Her questions are pertinent here as well. The present reading demonstrates that Paul’s use of warfare terms in 2 Cor 10– 13 reveals the apostle’s understanding of a world in which a cosmic struggle between God and Satan exists and his understanding that he participates in this conflict fighting alongside God. His use of military language portrays the Corinthians and the false apostles as participants in this battle as well. The imagery also reveals the sufferings the apostle undergoes as one enlisted in God’s army and God’s power in preserving him in all of these adversities. This martial terminology points to a two-level conflict that involves human and suprahuman actors.

70

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

2.4 Arena of Warfare: The Mind and Knowledge of God 10:4–6 2.4 Arena of Warfare (4) τὰ γὰρ ὅπλα τῆς στρατείας ἡµῶν οὐ σαρκικὰ ἀλλὰ δυνατὰ τῷ θεῷ πρὸς καθαίρεσιν ὀχυρωµάτων, λογισµοὺς καθαιροῦντες (5) καὶ πᾶν ὕψωµα ἐπαιρόµενον κατὰ τῆς γνώσεως τοῦ θεοῦ, καὶ αἰχµαλωτίζοντες πᾶν νόηµα εἰς τὴν ὑπακοὴν τοῦ Χριστοῦ, (6) καὶ ἐν ἑτοίµῳ ἔχοντες ἐκδικῆσαι πᾶσαν παρακοήν, ὅταν πληρωθῇ ὑµῶν ἡ ὑπακοή. (4) For the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly but mighty through God for the destruction of strongholds, destroying reasonings (5) and every high entity being raised against the knowledge of God, and capturing every mind for the obedience of Christ, (6) standing ready to punish every disobedience, whenever your obedience has been fulfilled.

As discussed above, Paul writes in 5:16 of no longer knowing κατὰ σάρκα: Ὥστε ἡµεῖς ἀπὸ τοῦ νῦν οὐδένα οἴδαµεν κατὰ σάρκα· εἰ καὶ ἐγνώκαµεν κατὰ σάρκα Χριστόν, ἀλλὰ νῦν οὐκέτι γινώσκοµεν (5:16). Here, in chapters 10–13, Paul returns to an epistemological theme and highlights thinking and the mind. The presence of epistemic terms signifies an important sphere of the war. Paul uses the noun λογισµός in 10:4 and the related verb and participle forms throughout this chapter and in chapters 11–12. The appearance of this word and its cognates suggests an emphasis by Paul on the Corinthians’ reasonings. In 10:2a, Paul highlights his own thinking (λογίζοµαι) and intention about opposing his accusers when he arrives in Corinth. In 10:2b he mentions those who think (τοὺς λογιζοµένους) that he and his cohorts walk according to the flesh. In this verse, Paul pits his own thinking against those who think contrary to him. In 10:7 Paul also admonishes the person confident of belonging to Christ to think again (λογιζέσθω) not only about her own state but also the apostles’ position of belonging to Christ. Furthermore, when Paul addresses the second round of accusations in this chapter in which he faces charges about writing harsh letters but being weak in person (10:10), he invites his accuser to think again (λογιζέσθω) about the allegation (10:11). The apostle asserts that he is not one thing in his letters and another in person but that his letters represent him and his gospel. Just as Paul argues earlier that he is not inconsistent (1:17– 22), he also maintains in chapter 10 that he is not incongruent whether or not he is present with the Corinthians (1:17). Paul’s repeated admonitions to his audience to re-think and to re-consider suggests that part of the reasonings (λογισµοί) of verse four which his divine weapons need to destroy is the Corinthians’ and his opponents’ flawed thinking about him. Their reasoning concerning him is defective, and he advises them to rethink their position. Further support for this interpretation occurs in 11:5, where Paul argues that he does not think (λογίζοµαι) that he is in any way inferior to these super-apostles. Here again, as he does in 10:2, Paul juxtaposes his own thinking to the Corinthians’ thinking. While they so readily accept the super-apostles, assuming them to be something, Paul declares the erroneous nature of their logic by insisting that he is not inferior to them in any way. But Paul does not want the Corinthians to over-evaluate him either, writing in 12:6

2.4 Arena of Warfare

71

that he does not want them to think (λογίσηται) more of him than they should. Through the use of this λογισ- language, Paul attempts to correct a faulty perception of himself, promote a balanced assessment of his identity, as well as direct the Corinthians into an overall reorientation of their mindset to his gospel. His gospel, not the one proclaimed by the false apostles, is the true word of the Lord. At the same time, however, the use of λογισµός in 10:4 entails more than the flawed thinking about Paul. It appears in a list of items fit for destruction – ὀχυρώµατα and ὑψώµατα. The term ὀχύρωµα has military implications. It refers to strongholds that protect cities, which when breached and destroyed allow the vulnerable city to be taken (Proverbs 10:29; 21:22; Nahum 3:12, 14; Psalm 88:40, 89:40 LXX). It may be that Paul has in mind Proverbs 21:22 LXX: πόλεις ὀχυρὰς ἐπέβη σοφὸς καὶ καθεῖλεν τὸ ὀχύρωµα ἐφ’ ᾧ ἐπεποίθεισαν οἱ ἀσεβεῖς (a wise person went up against the strong cities and destroyed the stronghold in which the ungodly people had confidence). If so, he depicts himself as the wise one who disrupts the confidence of the enemy by destroying the enemy’s strongholds. In addition, Philo’s reference to the strategies of the sophists in De Confusione Linguarum presents similar language to Paul’s: Τὸ γὰρ κατεσκευασµένον ὀχύρωµα διὰ τῆς τῶν λόγων πιθανότητος οὐδενὸς ἕνεκα ἑτέρου κατεσκευάζετο ἤ τοῦ µετατραπῆναι καὶ µετακλιθῆναι διάνοιαν ἀπὸ τῆς τοῦ θεοῦ τιµῆς. Οὗ τί ἂν γένοιτο ἀδικώτερον; (129–130) Πρεπωδέστατον … µισοπονήρῳ ψυχῇ κατὰ ἀσεβῶν ἠκονηµένῃ τὸ βεβαιοῦσθαι καθαιρήσειν πάντα λόγον ἀποστρέφειν διάνοιαν ὁσιότητος ἀναπείθοντα. (131) For the stronghold (ὀχύρωµα) which was built through persuasiveness of argument was built solely for the purpose of diverting and deflecting the mind from honoring God. And what greater sin against justice could there be than this?… Most fitting for the soul which hates evil, whose edge has been made sharp against the impious, is that it receive strength to pull down (καθαιρέω) every argument which would persuade the mind to turn away from holiness.”80

This quotation from Philo which connects persuasive speech and its ability to create a stronghold provides an interesting comparison to Paul’s situation.81 The super-apostles are eloquent speakers (2 Cor 10:10; 11:6) whose rhetorical skills have persuaded the Corinthians to embrace what is in Paul’s view a message different than the one originally received. Philo’s depiction of the purpose of the sophists’ persuasive arguments to turn the mind away from God and holiness provides a fitting parallel to 2 Cor 10:4–5 (cf. 11:3–4). In addition, Philo’s belief and description of these arguments as strongholds which need 80

Adapted translation of Philo, Conf. 129, 131. Note also the discussion of this passage from Philo in Malherbe, “Antisthenes and Odysseus,” 146–147 who chronicles the similarities between Paul and Philo. Yet he believes the differences are most important. Most notably, for Paul “the issues at stake are cognitive and volitional rather than sophistical” (147). 81

72

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

pulling down corresponds to Paul’s own viewpoint of his opponents’ speech as creating strongholds which need to be destroyed. That Paul’s imagery participates in a cultural encyclopedia in which “strongholds” can depict both military and rhetorical structures points to two things.82 First, what Paul endeavors to destroy through God’s power are reasonings and sophisticated arguments so entrenched that they have become strong fortresses in need of destruction. Second, these sophisticated arguments sway the Corinthians away from what he considers to be the true gospel, for they entail “another Jesus” and “another gospel” (11:4). The ὕψωµα (10:5) which Paul declares must also be destroyed has been translated as “proud obstacle” (NRSV), “pretension” (NAB), or “proud argument” (NLT). These translations cohere with the terminology of reasonings or arguments found in the previous verse. The word ὕψωµα occurs only one other time in the Pauline corpus, in Romans 8:39. There the term appears among a list that includes entities Paul views as opposing God and believers (οὔτε ἄγγελοι οὔτε ἀρχαὶ οὔτε ἐνεστῶτα οὔτε µέλλοντα οὔτε δυνάµεις οὔτε ὕψωµα οὔτε βάθος οὔτε τις κτίσις ἑτέρα δυνήσεται ἡµᾶς χωρίσαι ἀπὸ τῆς ἀγάπης τοῦ θεοῦ v.38b–39) and is often translated as “height.” Paul may use this term and its opposite (βάθος) in an astronomical way in Romans, signifying the world above and the world below. In this reading, Paul declares that nothing in the world above or in the world below can separate believers from the love of God. Τhe fact that Paul lists this term in Romans among other powers sheds light on how he may be using the word here; he has in mind some kind of cosmic entity that opposes God.83 That Paul uses ὕψωµα in 2 Corinthians 10:5 in a similar way to Romans 8:39 – that is, as pointing to a world above – is not out of the question, given the cosmic language that precedes it. What is more, the presence of πᾶν qualifies ὕψωµα in 10:5, making it more specific than just the general world above or height as it is often translated in Romans.84 Paul’s use of πᾶν points to every kind of element or “every kind of high/exalted entity” in opposition to God. The KJV translation “every high thing” captures this sentiment, expanding the notion from denoting merely proud thoughts or proud arguments to every high thing, which may include a cosmic element reminiscent of Romans 8:39. 82

For the concept of “cultural encyclopedia” see Eco, The Limits of Interpretation. Things present and things to come are not relegated to the cosmic realm but could include cosmic entities. Here the remarks by Adams, Constructing the World, are germane to this discussion. “The meaning of these terms [ὕψωµα, βάθος] is disputed. Some see a reference to heaven and Sheol (the ‘height’ and ‘depth’ of the three-storey universe). Both ὕψωµα and βάθος, however, were technical terms in astrology. Paul may thus have in view the celestial powers which were believed to control the destinies of human beings. This would certainly fit with the earlier mention of ἄγγελοι, ἀρχαί and δυνάµεις” (184–185). 84 Barrett, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, writes “it is not so easy to deal with exalted thing (ὕψωµα…)” (252, emphasis his). 83

2.4 Arena of Warfare

73

Therefore, the phrase πᾶν ὕψωµα denotes proud thoughts as well as any cosmic entity in opposition to God. With this expression, Paul anticipates his reference to the ἄγγελος σατανᾶ in 12:7, a being which opposes his ascent and, by extension, knowledge of God.85 Here the apostle foreshadows the impending defeat of the satanic entity that torments him. At the same time, in 11:20 Paul links the false apostles to the “high entity” being lifted up in 10:5. He uses the same word, ἐπαίρω, to describe his opponents. Just as this high entity is lifted up against the knowledge of God, the false apostles’ lifting up of themselves participates in this obstruction through their proclamation of another Jesus and a different gospel (11:4). This interpretation takes into account the cosmic context of the word in 2 Corinthians 10. However, what is most important here is that, both in Romans and in 2 Corinthians, Paul emphasizes the oppositional nature of ὕψωµα. In Romans it seeks to separate the believer from the love of God, and here it contests knowledge of God. One can surmise then that the apostle deems the adversarial nature of ὕψωµα as an important characteristic of it. The ὕψωµα obstructs knowledge from God and about God. 2.4.1 Noēma (Νόηµα) Although Paul does not explicitly inform his audience about the agent responsible for lifting up the ὕψωµα, the next phrase of v. 5 sheds light on the identity of the enemy. In the remainder of v. 5, Paul argues that his divine weapons are not only in the business of destroying strongholds, arguments, and every high or exalted entity but also in capturing every mind (νόηµα) for the obedience of Christ. Earlier in the letter, Paul uses the same word to discuss how the minds (νοήµατα) of Israel were hardened in the past, preventing them from beholding Moses and seeing the end of the glory (2 Cor 3:14).86 Paul then goes on to

85 Harris’s Second Epistle to the Corinthians, comments are worth quoting. He writes, “Reinforcing the notion of literal or figurative ‘elevation’ that is intrinsic to ὕψωµα is the present participle ἐπαιρόµενον (from ἐπαίρω, ‘raise up’), which is not middle but passive, whether it means ‘(that is) raised up’/ ‘erected’ or ‘that rises up/raises itself up.’ This ὕψωµα is no neutral ‘lofty thing’: it is set up or sets itself up ‘against’ or ‘in defiance of’ (κατά) the authentic knowledge of God” (682). Harris ultimately concludes that ὕψωµα refers to thoughts or arguments. As stated above, this study has expanded this notion to include a cosmic entity. See also Gräßer, Der Zweite Brief an die Korinther, 87–88. 86 Jewett, Paul’s Anthropological Terms, writes about 3:14a, “It is obvious that νόηµα is used in this context with the sense of ‘mind’ or ‘understanding’ rather than with the more ordinary sense of ‘thought’” (380). Note also Alfred Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, ICC (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1915), who says, “Strictly speaking, νοήµατα are the products of νοῦς, and therefore ‘thoughts’ rather than ‘minds’: but here, as in iv. 4 and xi. 3, νόηµα seems to mean the thinking faculty” (98).

74

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

address the reading of Moses in his day (2 Cor 3:15–16) and how, whenever Israel hears scripture, their hearts still have a veil over them.87 In addition, in 2 Corinthians 4:4 Paul discusses how the god of this age blinds the minds (νοήµατα) or thoughts of unbelievers.88 This same word, νόηµα, used in 10:5 appears also in 4:4, suggesting that Paul makes a connection between the minds that the god of this age blinds and the minds that Paul’s divine weapons capture. 89 To translate νόηµα as mind or thought in 10:5 coheres with the language of reasonings/arguments in 10:4 and the knowledge of God language in 10:5a.90 While Paul’s wording in 10:5 points to the unbelievers he mentions in 4:4, he registers implicitly his concern about his Corinthian audience as well. They are also in danger like the unbelievers in 4:4, as he explicitly states later in 11:3, where he writes, “I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve with his craftiness, your minds (νοήµατα) may be led astray from sincerity and purity which is in Christ.” Just as unbelievers are being blinded, the Corinthians’ minds are in danger of being led astray through deception. It seems that from Paul’s perspective some Corinthians have already been deceived in some sense (11:1–4).91 Paul’s declaration that he uses his divine weapons to capture every mind (10:5) includes not only the minds of the unbelievers of 4:4 but also the minds of the Corinthians themselves. Consequently, the apostle’s statement that he captures πᾶς νόηµα (2 Cor 10:5) points backward to 2 Corinthians 3:14 and 2 Corinthians 4:4. Ηis language also points forward to 2 Corinthians 11:3, indicating the kind of battle

87 Paul makes an interesting move in 3:14–15. He uses νόηµα to refer to hardened minds in 3:14, and in 3:15 he writes that to this day Israel has a veil over their heart (καρδία) whenever Moses is read. He employs the plural form of νόηµα but the singular form of καρδία. Nonetheless, it seems that in these two verses, Paul equates mind and heart. He repeats this connection in 4:4 and 4:6: The god of this age blinds minds but God shines in our hearts. Yet in the remaining incidences where Paul uses νόηµα he does not use καρδία language. It is not clear if the apostle continues to link implicitly heart and mind, although it seems that if he were continuing this correlation, he would reiterate his usage of καρδία. 88 Jewett, Paul’s Anthropological Terms, translates νόηµα as mind in this verse, writing, “Here as in the earlier case [3:14a] νόηµα means mind rather than thought. The peculiar thing about each of these instances is that Paul uses νόηµα instead of νοῦς” (381). 89 The phrase “god of this age” denotes Satan, an entity that opposes God and humanity. Although this phrase does not appear anywhere else in the New Testament, it is similar to other expressions used in the New Testament to refer to Satan such as “the ruler of this world” in John 12:31 and 16:11 (cf. 1 Cor 2:6, 8). For discussion of this phrase view the section Paul’s Depiction of Satan in Chapter 3. 90 Jewett, Paul’s Anthropological Terms, also believes that the translation of “mind” or “thought” is appropriate in 10:5. He prefers, however, the translation of “mind” (382). 91 Note the discussion in Abraham Malherbe, “Through the Eye of the Needle: Simplicity or Singleness?” ResQ 5 (1961): 119–129, especially 122, 125.

2.4 Arena of Warfare

75

he is engaged in – a battle against the god of this age for the minds of unbelievers and believers alike.92 The minds that the god of this age blinds and the minds in danger of being led astray are the very minds he fights to capture for the obedience of Christ in 10:5. 93 Paul’s reorientation of the Corinthians involves not only calling them to reevaluate him but also challenging them to grasp the reality that powers are at work leading them astray from the true gospel (2 Cor 11:3–4). Through the use of νόηµα language the apostle implicitly warns the Corinthians that the god of this age, whom he has previously characterized as blinding the minds of unbelievers, is also at work among them.94 92 Outside of the instances already discussed (3:14; 4:4; 10:5; 11:3), the only other place where νόηµα appears in 2 Corinthians is in 2:11 where Paul informs his audience that we are not ignorant of Satan’s νοήµατα. There νοήµατα has the connotation of purpose, design, or plot. However, more significant is Paul’s statement in Phil 4:7 in which Paul writes that the Philippians’ minds (νοήµατα) will be guarded (φρουρεῖν) by God’s peace. The apostle believes that the minds of believers are so important that they need protection. Interestingly, the term φρουρεῖν is a military term. Gerald Hawthorne writes, “God’s peace, like a garrison of soldiers, will keep guard over our thoughts and feelings so that they will be as safe against the assaults of worry and fear as any fortress” (Gerald Hawthorne, Philippians, WBC 43 [Waco: Word, 1983], 185). 93 As one who stands at the “painful and glorious juncture” (quote from Martyn, “Epistemology,” 107–8) where some are being saved and some are perishing, Paul believes the capturing of every mind (2 Cor 10:5) is his divine mission. Could it also be that the minds of his opponents are part of the minds (πᾶς νόηµα) that Paul hopes to capture in the public reading of this letter? This, indeed, may be an intriguing possibility. See also Gräßer, Der Zweite Brief an die Korinther, who states, “Für solche »Gotteswaffen« … für Waffen des Geistes, hat sich Paulus entschieden, Waffen, die den Gegner nicht bekämpfen, um ihn zu vernichten, sondern um ihn zu widerlegen und – wenn möglich – ihn für das Wort der Wahrheit zu gewinnen und aufzuerbauen” (86). 94 In the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, one finds similar references to a relationship between the mind, deception, and a satanic figure. Simeon tells his sons of his jealousy for his brother Joseph and how he wanted to kill him. He then proceeds to inform his children about what precipitated this response from him regarding his brother. He declares, “I set my heart against him to kill him because the ruler of deceit (ὁ ἄρχων τῆς πλάνης) sent the spirit of deceit (τὸ πνεῦµα τῆς πλάνης) and blinded (ἐτύφλωσε) my mind (νοῦς) so that I did not regard him as a brother….” (2.7). In addition, in the Testament of Judah similar language appears. In lamenting his past love of money and the ungodly actions this love for prosperity caused, Judah tells his children of God’s mercy towards him because he acted “in ignorance. For the ruler of deceit (ὁ ἄρχων τῆς πλάνης) blinded (ἐτύφλωσε) me and I was ignorant as a man and as flesh corrupted through sins” (19.4). The above quotes are modified translations of H. W. Hollander and M. de Jonge, The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: A Commentary (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1985), 111, 113, 218. In both cases, the writers of these testaments attribute blindness to a suprahuman figure, the ruler of deceit, also known as the devil, Beliar and Satan in other sections of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs (T. Naph. 3.1, 8.4; T. Ash. 3.2, 6.4; T. Jud. 25.3; T. Zeb. 9.8; T. Benj. 3.3; T. Gad 4.7; T. Reu. 2.2; T. Levi 3.3, 18.12). Dates for the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs range from 2nd century B.C. to 200 A.D. In addition, the provenance of the document is quite complicated and difficult to determine. There is some discussion about whether the Testaments are a Christian document

76

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

The apostle’s stark dichotomy between God and the god of this age persists throughout the remaining chapters of the letter. With this language, therefore, Paul illustrates the epistemological component of this cosmic struggle and the crucial nature of his task. For Paul those who fall in the category of “the perishing” in 2 Corinthians 4:3 are not abandoned to remain under the dominion of the god of this age; this category is not a fixed state. The ones who are perishing, who cannot see the light of the gospel, have minds that can still be captured for Christ. Conversely, the category comprised of the “ones who are being saved” is not a fixed one either, as demonstrated in Paul’s fear of the Corinthians’ being deceived (2 Cor 11:3). For Paul, the categories of “perishing” and “being saved” are not static but dynamic. Such a reading coheres with Paul’s subsequent statement in 13:5, in which he admonishes the Corinthians to “test yourselves if you are in the faith, examine yourselves.” Whatever this may mean specifically, Paul’s statement here indicates a belief that the Corinthians are in danger of being out of the faith and that they must take care to prevent this from happening. According to Paul, minds can be hardened, blinded, led astray, and captured.95 That Paul describes the mind in this way throughout 2 Corinthians indicates the importance of the mind to the conflict at hand (3:14; 4:4; 10:5; 11:3; cf. Phil 4:7). This perspective is strengthened when one takes into account that Paul couples this language about the mind with the previously mentioned λογισ-stem words of reasoning and thinking. He encourages the Corinthians to rethink and reevaluate their views. The mind has become a battleground between God and the god of this age, and no one – believer or unbeliever – is exempt from this conflict.

or a reworking of a Jewish document. Hollander and Jonge, The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, write, “The fact that the Testaments functioned meaningfully in Christian circles at the end of the second century A.D. and the beginning of the third does not prove that they were composed at that time. They may represent a thorough and to a considerable degree consistent reworking of an earlier Jewish writing” (83). And again they write, “It is practically impossible to answer the question whether there ever existed Jewish Testaments in some form. If they existed, we shall never be able to reconstruct them with any degree of certainty” (85). It is important to acknowledge this discussion and the complexities surrounding this document. Despite the complications, however, these texts do bear witness to the existence of traditions about a satanic figure blinding humans and raises the possibility that Paul participates in this realm of thought. The writers of these texts perceive the ruler of deceit as a threat who has the power to blind and to deceive human beings. The similarities between these statements and 2 Cor 4:4 suggest that Paul’s perspective participates in a strand of ideas that depicts Satan as a blinding force. Significantly, these texts demonstrate a link between a suprahuman figure, the mind, and knowledge and contribute to the plausibility that such links exist for Paul as well. 95 If one also takes into account Phil 4:7, Paul also believes that minds can be guarded.

2.4 Arena of Warfare

77

2.4.2 Additional Epistemological Terms in 2 Corinthians 10–13 Paul’s epistemological emphasis, as demonstrated by the presence of λογισstem words in 2 Corinthians 10–12, by his language of perceiving in a new way in 2 Corinthians 5:16, and by his use of νόηµα language in 2 Corinthians 4:4, 10:5, and 11:3 (cf. 2 Cor 3:14) continues with his use of the verb συνίηµι in 2 Corinthians 10:12. Paul describes those among the Corinthians who commend themselves (2 Cor 10:12, 18; cf. 2 Cor 3:1) and compare themselves with themselves as people who lack understanding (συνίηµι). Those people who engage in such behavior do not comprehend the divine truth that it is not the person who commends herself but the one whom God commends that is really approved (2 Cor 10:17–18). Therefore, any boasting that arises from comparing oneself to another (2 Cor 10:12) is the wrong kind of boasting, since such comparisons rest upon a faulty foundation – human knowledge and human characteristics (cf. 2 Cor 10:10). In 2 Corinthians 10:17 Paul utilizes a quote from Jeremiah 9:23–24 to respond to his opponents’ actions. His quotation is not a direct citation from the LXX, but a terse summary of what one finds in the LXX passage. In 2 Corinthians 10:17 Paul writes, “Ὁ δὲ καυχώµενος ἐν κυρίῳ καυχάσθω.” The Corinthians would have known this citation because Paul has quoted this passage in earlier correspondence to the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 1:31. Here again the apostle returns to the theme of boasting in the Lord. Moreover, the verses previous to the LXX passage that Paul cites contain admonitions against boasting in wisdom, strength, and wealth. The text admonishes its audience to boast instead that it understands (συνίηµι) and knows the Lord. Τάδε λέγει κύριος, Μὴ καυχάσθω ὁ σοφὸς ἐν τῇ σοφίᾳ αὐτοῦ, καὶ µὴ καυχάσθω ὁ ἰσχυρὸς ἐν τῇ ἰσχύι αὐτοῦ, καὶ µὴ καυχάσθω ὁ πλούσιος ἐν τῷ πλούτῳ αὐτοῦ, αλλ’ ἢ ἐν τούτῳ καυχάσθω ὁ καυχώµενος, συνίειν καὶ γινώσκειν ὅτι ἐγώ εἰµι κύριος ποιῶν ἔλεος καὶ κρίµα καὶ δικαιοσύνην ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, ὅτι ἐν τούτοις τὸ θέληµά µου, λέγει κύριος. (Jeremiah 9:22–23).

The LXX passage supports the apostle’s position and his earlier statements about his own boasting whose foundation is God and God’s actions (2 Cor 10:8, 13, 15, 16). In the Jeremiah passage, the Lord critiques those who boast of their own wisdom, strength, and riches. Although Paul does not quote all of verses 23–24, his summary of this passage suggests that the broader themes behind these statements are, in his view, applicable to the situation in Corinth. It appears that his opponents boast “according to human standards” (κατὰ σαρκά; 2 Cor. 11:18) by emphasizing their rhetorical skills (2 Cor 10:10; 11:6), their own commendations of each other (2 Cor 10:18), their right to remuneration (2 Cor 10:12), and their strength (2 Cor 10:10; 11:30; 12:5). Paul enlists the words of God to Israel to bear witness with him against his opponents. The Lord in the Jeremiah passage explains what is worthy of boasting about: “Let the one who boasts boast in this: that this person understands (συνίειν) and knows that I am the Lord.” Even though Paul gives a shortened version of this

78

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

verse in 10:17, his use of συνίηµι in 10:12 suggests the import of the entire context of this Jeremiah passage. Paul focuses upon the false apostles’ lack of understanding and highlights that his opponents’ behavior demonstrates a total lack of comprehension of godly actions and decorum. Instead of boasting in the Lord, they boast in their own abilities and attributes. Paul’s use of the word συνιᾶσιν in 10:12 indicates the link with Jeremiah 9, which becomes explicit in 10:17. By characterizing his opponents as ones who lack understanding, Paul reveals that they do not fulfill the Jeremian call: they cannot boast in the Lord since their behavior illustrates they do not understand or know the Lord. Later in chapter 11, Paul informs the Corinthians about why these super-apostles do not align with the Jeremian call: their God is Satan and not the Lord (2 Cor 11:13–15). Although they compare themselves with each other, Paul implicitly compares them with those in the Jeremiah passage who boast in things other than God. The characteristics of Jeremiah’s audience correspond with how Paul depicts his opponents in the rest of the letter. In Jeremiah 9:4–5, the prophet describes his audience as deceitful and liars. Paul describes the false apostles in the same way (2 Cor 11:13–15). The similar characteristics of Paul’s opponents and Jeremiah’s audience as well as Paul’s emphasis on understanding (συνιᾶσιν) point to the larger context of the quote. Significantly, the same quote appears in 1 Kingdoms 2:10 in Hannah’s song to the Lord: αλλ’ ἢ ἐν τούτῳ καυχάσθω ὁ καυχώµενος, συνίειν καὶ γινώσκειν τὸν κύριον. In his article, “‘Not Beyond the Things Which Are Written:’ A Call to Boast Only in the Lord” (1 Cor. 4:6), J. Ross Wagner argues persuasively that Paul alludes to both Jeremiah 9:23–24 and 1 Kingdoms 2:10 in his quote in 1 Corinthians 1:31.96 The same can be said of Paul’s use of this quote in 2 Corinthians 10:17. The command not to boast, the admonition not to speak high things, and the recognition of the Lord as a God of knowledge in 1 Kingdoms 2:3 coheres with the situation in 2 Corinthians 10–13. The apostle emphasizes the knowledge of God, the Corinthians’ entertaining of reasonings and arguments contrary to the knowledge of God, and the false apostles’ boasting behavior. In addition, the reference in 1 Kingdoms to ὑψηλά (2:3) connects with Paul’s theme of things being raised up against the knowledge of God (10:5). Here, it is lofty speech that corresponds to the false apostles’ lofty behavior. The emphasis on knowledge, understanding, and knowing the Lord in both Jeremiah and in 1 Kingdoms illustrates that behind Paul’s paraphrasing of these passages lies an implicit link to knowledge through the reference to boasting. Paul accomplishes two things by alluding to these passages. First, the more obvious result is that Paul marshals scriptural evidence to show that real boasting points to God and away from the self. Relatedly, he portrays his current situation in light of past prophetic circumstances. Second, through his use of 96 J. Ross Wagner, “‘Not Beyond the Things Which Are Written:’ A Call to Boast Only in the Lord (1 Cor 4.6),” NTS 44 (1998): 279–287.

2.4 Arena of Warfare

79

συνιᾶσιν in 10:12, which echoes similar language in Jeremiah and 1 Kingdoms, Paul highlights the epistemological deficiencies of his opponents. Inevitably, Paul turns the tables on those who accuse him of walking κατὰ σάρκα in 10:2. By commending themselves and measuring themselves against each other, they are the ones who lack understanding and so live κατὰ σάρκα (11:18), not Paul. This focus on God as the one who commends those who are approved and not those who commend themselves (2 Cor 10:18) accentuates Paul’s emphasis on divine action, an emphasis with which he begins chapter 10. It also serves to solidify the link he forges with boasting in the previous verse. Just as one’s boasting is grounded in the Lord, so too is one’s commendation and approval. Language of cognition begins and ends this section of the letter, as illustrated by the use of φρονέω in 2 Corinthians 13:11.97 In this verse, Paul admonishes the Corinthians to think the same thing. Previous to 2 Corinthians 13:11, he has attempted to destroy faulty reasonings (10:4–5) and capture the Corinthians’ minds (10:5), asked them to rethink (10:7), and pointed out lack of understanding (10:12; 11:3,13–15, 19–20; 13:5). He now encourages them to be unified in thought. Paul does not specify here what he wants the Corinthians to think. Yet all that precedes this call to harmony indicates that he wants them to become unified in perceiving the satanic influences in their congregation and to understand the conflict around the knowledge of God. As a result, if they follow Paul’s admonitions and reject the false gospel and the different Jesus (11:4) proclaimed by the super-apostles, they can form a united front against the false apostles and prevent Paul from having to be bold when he arrives for his future visit (10:2; 13:2–3). The apostle’s desire for them to think the same thing includes changing how they view the current situation in Corinth and realizing they participate in a cosmic war within which eloquent speech (11:6) becomes irrelevant. The apostle attempts to help his audience grasp the existence of a supernatural struggle with epistemological dimensions. 2.4.3 Paul’s Use of Genesis 1–3 and Traditions Surrounding Genesis 1–3 Paul’s focus on the mind, along with his allusion to Genesis in 2 Corinthians 11:3, highlights the danger of deception that the Corinthians face. His reference to Genesis also recalls his earlier allusions to Genesis in the letter. In 2 Corinthians 4:6 he echoes Genesis 1:3–4 when he writes, “The God who said, ‘Out 97 Other terms related to knowing appear in the final sections of this letter. In 11:31, Paul writes that God knows (οἶδα; cf. 11:11) he does not lie. In 12:2–3, the apostle knows (οἶδα) a person caught up to the third heaven, but only God knows (οἶδα) whether this happened in the body or not. Finally, in 13:5–6, Paul uses the word γινώσκω to refer to the Corinthians’ knowledge of Jesus’s presence with them. Paul’s use of these additional epistemological terms functions primarily in three ways: 1) to carve out knowledge to which only God is privy; 2) to assert the limited nature of human epistemology; and 3) to reaffirm, albeit in a probing manner, that Christ’s presence is among the Corinthians.

80

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

of darkness light will shine,’ has shone in our hearts.”98 In 2 Corinthians 5:17 Paul speaks of new creation (καινὴ κτίσις): “So that if anyone is in Christ, new creation.” This new creation is a reconciled creation. The references to Genesis in these verses suggest that Genesis 1–3 and traditions surrounding these chapters play significant roles in Paul’s argument regarding the mind, knowledge, and deception. In 2 Corinthians 11:13–15, Paul speaks about false apostles being transformed into apostles of Christ and servants of righteousness and Satan being transformed into an angel of light. With the οὖν of 2 Corinthians 11:15, Paul declares that if Satan transforms himself, then his servants follow suit; he connects their transformation to Satan’s. The apostle explicitly names the power he perceives as operating behind his rivals and their deception of the Corinthians. As Satan’s representatives these emissaries have become an extension of the suprahuman agent in the human realm. This extension becomes evident in the connection Paul makes between their transformation and their mission, for he highlights a similarity to the serpent’s deception of Eve and the deception perpetrated by Satan’s servants upon the Corinthians. The same mission of deception orchestrated by the serpent in 11:3 becomes the servants’ mission in 11:13, that is, these agents participate in Satan’s obstructive project by working to deceive the Corinthians’ νοήµατα and seduce them away from the truth. Common to 11:3 and 11:13–15 is the presence of deception, which connects both passages to the Genesis story. Although Genesis does not include an idea of Satan transforming himself, this notion does appear in The Greek Life of Adam and Eve. More than likely, Paul refers to traditions similar to those in these documents. In The Greek Life of Adam and Eve, a satanic transformation takes place in Paradise: (17:1) Καὶ εὐθέως ἐκρεµάσθη παρὰ τῶν τειχέων τοῦ παραδείσου. Καὶ ὅτε ἀνῆλθον οἱ ἄγγελοι τοῦ θεοῦ προσκυνῆσαι, τότε ὁ Σατανᾶς ἐγένετο ἐν εἴδει ἀγγέλου καὶ ὕµνει τὸν θεὸν καθάπερ οἱ ἄγγελοι. (17:2) Καὶ παρακύψας99 ἐκ τοῦ τείχους εἶδον αὐτὸν ὅµοιον ἀγγέλου.100

98

Paul’s statement here is not a direct quotation of Gen 1:3–4, but he does allude to it. His words may also echo Is 9:1 (LXX) where the people in darkness see a great light (φῶς µέγα) and the light will shine (φῶς λάµψει) upon them. 99 Johannes Tromp, The Life of Adam and Eve in Greek: A Critical Edition, PVTG 6 (Leiden: Brill, 2005), observes that in these manuscripts, “The participle tends to lose its capacity of being declined” (53). Note also the many variants for this word (141). Both Marinus de Jonge and Johannes Tromp, The Life of Adam and Eve and Related Literature, GAP 4 (Sheffield: Academic Press, 1997) recognize the inconsistent way in which this passage presents Satan. They write, “In 17.1–2 it is said that the devil, in order to mislead Eve, was disguised as an angel. In the very next sentence he is depicted as hanging from the wall of Paradise (therefore in the form of the serpent), whereas Eve saw him in the likeness of an angel” (48). 100 The Greek text comes from Tromp, Life of Adam and Eve, who dates the document from 100–300 CE. Marshall D. Johnson (“Life of Adam and Eve: A New Translation and

2.4 Arena of Warfare

81

(17:1) And immediately he (Satan) was hanging from the walls of Paradise. And when the angels of God went up to worship, then Satan came in the form of an angel and was praising God like the angels. (17:2) And while he was bending over from the wall I [Eve] saw him as an angel (17:1–2; author’s translation).

This transformation takes place before Satan deceives Eve and persuades her to take the forbidden fruit. Although this narrative does not include the verb µετασχηµατίζω, it does provide the imagery of Satan coming in the form of an angel and behaving like the angels of God. Both of these features have import for Paul’s description of Satan in 2 Corinthians 11:14; Satan disguises himself as an angelic figure. Also, deception is a major theme in the Greek Life of Adam and Eve and in Paul’s description of Satan and the false apostles. In both accounts, evil appears and acts righteous. Furthermore, the Greek Life of Adam and Eve conveys a conversation between Satan and the serpent, with Satan asking the serpent to be his vessel and to participate in his deception of Eve and Adam. (16:5) λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ διάβολος· µὴ φοβοῦ· γενοῦ µοι σκεῦος κάγὼ λαλήσω διὰ στόµατός σου ῥῆµα ἕν πρὸς τὸ ἐξαπατῆσαι αὐτούς. And the devil said to him [ὁ ὄφις], “Do not fear. Be a vessel for me and I will speak one word through your mouth in order to deceive them.” (16:5).

Although the narrative does not relay the serpent’s response, the next time the serpent appears in the story is when Eve states in 17:4 that the devil answers her through the mouth of the snake. The juxtaposition of the jarring images of Satan disguised as an angel singing praises to God, hanging from the wall like a serpent, and as an entity using the mouth of the serpent to persuade Eve to disobey God’s command underscores Satan’s crafty approach (17:1–4). Moreover, this text makes an exact connection between Satan and the serpent, a connection that is not clear in Genesis 3.101 The existence of such traditions implies that although Paul does not make an explicit connection between the

Introduction,” in OTP, ed. James H. Charlesworth [New York: Doubleday, 1985]) states, “The most natural span for the original composition would be between 100 B.C. and A.D. 200, more probably toward the end of the first Christian century. The Greek and Latin texts were produced between that time and A.D. 400” (2:252). However, a late date does not preclude the probability that the traditions within these documents go back to an earlier time. 101 An equation of the serpent and Satan occurs in the book of Revelation: “And the great dragon was cast out, the ancient serpent/snake, the one called the devil and Satan, who leads astray the whole world” (12:7; author’s translation); “And he [the angel] grabbed the dragon, the ancient serpent/snake, which is the devil and Satan, and locked him up for a thousand years” (20:2; author’s translation). In these characterizations there is both the collapsing of the serpent and Satan figure into one as well as the notion of Satan as a deceiver who leads people astray; Cf. Wis 2:24; Rom 16:20.

82

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

serpent and Satan in 2 Corinthians 11:3, it is a link he takes for granted.102 In 2 Corinthians 11:3, Genesis 3 forms the basis for his concern that the Corinthians are being led astray. For Paul, the Corinthian crisis is a type of reenactment of Satan’s original deception. While there may be new actors on the stage, the Corinthians and the false apostles, the main characters of the drama, God and Satan, remain. Paul’s employment of Genesis in chapter 11 corresponds to his earlier uses of Genesis in the epistle. Genesis becomes a lens through which to view and evaluate the present Corinthian crisis. Employing the setting of Genesis’s creation account, Paul brings to the fore the conflicts between light and darkness, blindness and revelation. In 2 Corinthians 4:4, the god of this age blinds, yet the same creator God who said, “Out of darkness light will shine” (Gen 1:3), brings forth the light of the gospel. Similarly, in 2 Corinthians 5:17–19, Paul connects reconciliation, a term denoting peace between two former enemies, with the language of Genesis, new creation (καινὴ κτίσις). God as the initiator and source of this reconciliation ends the hostility between the world and the divine and brings about a new creation in Christ, indicating that a new Genesis has unfolded through the Christ event. In this instance, Genesis provides the language with which the apostle frames the newness of what has taken place. The old creation has passed away, and new things have come forth. 103 The apostle’s application of Genesis in these examples provides a window into his perspective on the origin of the struggle he faces. It also grants insight into Paul’s understanding of God’s power to bring forth light in the midst of darkness. This act of God in the past assures Paul and his readers that God continues to dispel darkness, even the darkness perpetrated by the god of this age. The language of new creation links the old Genesis to the new Genesis inaugurated by the Christ event, and this new creation is one that has been reconciled by God’s own benevolent act. The message of divine salvation that Paul proclaims is the word God entrusts to him (2 Cor 3:5–6; 4:1; 10:14), the ministry to which he gives his life (2 Cor 4:11–12), and the calling on behalf of which he suffers (2 Cor 4:8–10; 6:4–10; 11:22–33). As indicated by the previous discussion, Genesis 1–3 and interpretations of it play a significant role in Paul’s perspective on cosmology, epistemology, and theological anthropology in 2 Corinthians. In terms of cosmology, Genesis 1– 3 provides an outlook on a world in which suprahuman powers, God and Satan, 102 Susan R. Garrett, “The God of This World and the Affliction of Paul,” in Greeks, Romans, and Christians: Essays in Honor of Abraham J. Malherbe, eds. David L. Balch, Everett Ferguson, and Wayne Meeks (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 106. 103 Although God’s reconciliation of the world through Christ has taken place, the proclamation of the word of reconciliation still needs to occur, and people still need reconciliation to God, as seen in Paul’s urging of the Corinthians in 5:20. From Paul’s perspective, God’s action of reconciliation precedes and precipitates any and all subsequent action of reconciliation. It is because God has acted that humanity can now respond.

2.4 Arena of Warfare

83

oppose each other (2 Cor 4:4–6; 11:3–4) and humans and suprahuman beings share social space. With regard to epistemology, the god of this age blinds minds and Satan’s servants deceive. But God the Creator, just as in the beginning of time, brings forth light (i.e. knowledge; 2 Cor 4:6), and sends revelation, thereby opposing the strategy of the enemy. And, finally, Genesis 1–3 is pertinent to theological anthropology because the contest between God and Satan affects humanity. Humanity experiences blindness from Satan and revelation from God. For Paul, these early chapters of Genesis provide the language to describe the larger cosmic conflict around knowledge of God and supply the language to express God’s divine action on behalf of humanity. Furthermore, Paul’s link between Satan’s and his servants’ transformation indicates another important facet of theological anthropology. Humans become agents of God or Satan. They gain sight or suffer blindness, and as servants of God or Satan they facilitate these states. For Paul, there are no neutral observers. In effect, Genesis 1–3 and traditions that develop out of it become an important part of Paul’s “immense web”104 regarding the events occurring in Corinth and the larger apocalyptic struggle occurring between God and Satan that makes the events in Corinth possible. That Paul highlights only one aspect of the Genesis narrative in 2 Corinthians 11:3 is telling. He zeroes in on the part of the story that is most relevant to the situation in Corinth as he understands it, namely the episode in which the serpent deceives Eve through its cunning or trickery. There are several important features to Paul’s use of this Genesis narrative. First, Paul appeals to Hebrew scripture to frame the current situation in Corinth, a move which is not too surprising given that he does this elsewhere in the Corinthian correspondence (e.g. 2 Cor 3:7, 13; 4:6, 13; 9:9–10; cf. 1 Cor 10:1–11). Second, his statement illustrates that Genesis 1–3 shapes his view of the world. Deception or being led astray from God comes from an outside source, in this case the serpent. Third, Paul’s language regarding the serpent highlights forces in opposition to God. This opposition in Genesis takes the form of a snake, but in Corinth he describes this opposition in the form of servants of Satan (11:15; cf. 4:4). Fourth, Paul’s emphasis on the serpent’s deception of Eve and his connection between this part of the Genesis narrative and the mind in 11:3 relates to his other references to the mind elsewhere in this letter, most notably in 10:5. The reiteration of this theme suggests that the mind and its vulnerability to being captured is a central concern for Paul in this part of the epistle. In 2 Corinthians 4:4, 2 Corinthians 10:5, and 2 Corinthians 11:3, Paul’s concern centers around obstruction of insight into the divine. In 2 Corinthians 4:4 the god of this age blinds the minds of unbelievers so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ. Ιn 2 Corinthians 10:5, strongholds, reasonings, and high entities are being exalted against the knowledge of God. 104

Eco, The Limits of Interpretation, 145.

84

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

Through his use of the word νόηµα, Paul demonstrates that the same anti-God agent, the “god of this age,” is at work in 2 Corinthians 4:4, 2 Corinthians 10:5, and 2 Corinthians 11:3. 105 Evidence for this interpretation includes the following: (1) Paul’s use of νόηµα in 2 Corinthians 10:5 intimates that the god of this age who blinds the minds (νοήµατα) of unbelievers in 4:4 is again in view as the origin of the opposition here. (2) Paul uses ὕψωµα in Romans 8:38 with a cosmic referent, and the cosmic language in the context of 2 Corinthians 10:5 suggests that he uses the term in a similar way in this verse. Τhis usage reveals that his concern is broader than lofty or proud thoughts; he also deals with the source of such lofty thoughts, Satan himself. (3) Finally, Paul’s language in 2 Corinthians 10:4–5 moves from the items being destroyed, specific strongholds and reasonings, to the source behind them. The god of this age works to obstruct knowledge of God in Corinth through the sophisticated arguments of the false apostles. The notion of cosmic warfare that involves both human and suprahuman participants, which is such an essential part of Paul’s presentation, also occurs in the War Scroll. To this text the discussion now turns.

2.5 The War Scroll106 2.5 The War Scroll

The War Scroll107 depicts a final eschatological battle with God, Israel, the holy angels, and the sons of light on one side and Belial, the sons of darkness, and all the wicked on the other.108 Column 1 begins by narrating an attack by the sons of light against the sons of darkness (1.1–7).109 One of the interesting features of this document is the repeated emphasis on the presence of angels in 105

For the notion of anti-God powers see Martyn, Galatians, 370–373. 1QM, found in Cave 1, is the name of the most complete manuscript of this document. Six fragmentary manuscripts also exist 4Q491–496 (4QM1–6) although the precise relationship between the fragments and 1QM is difficult to determine. For a discussion of the manuscripts, consult Jean Duhaime, “War Scroll” in Damascus Document, War Scroll, and Related Documents, vol. 2 of The Dead Sea Scrolls: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek Texts with English Translations, ed. James H. Charlesworth (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1995), 80–83. 107 In his article, “War of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness” (Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls, eds. Lawrence H. Schiffman and James C. VanderKam [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000]), Philip R. Davies observes that since many scholars believe the Kittim, one of the enemies Israel faces in battle in the Scroll, refers to the Romans, the date for this document ranges from the 1st century BCE to the 1st century CE (2:967). 108 Davies, “War of the Sons of Light,” notes that the identity of the “sons of light” is “an intriguing problem” (2:967). Are they diaspora Jews or Judean Jews or both? God, angels, the Prince of Light, and Michael lead the sons of light. Yet it is not clear whether the Prince of Light and Michael are the same. Belial and the Kittim lead the sons of darkness (2:967). 109 Hebrew text, column, and line enumeration comes from Damascus Document, War Scroll, and Related Documents. Translations are modified versions of the text. Citations of 106

2.5 The War Scroll

85

the battle (7.6; 12.1,4–5; 17.6–7; cf. 9.15–16; 4Q491 frgs. 1–3 l. 3; 4Q491 frgs. 5–6; 4Q491 frg. 15.7–8). These suprahuman beings fight alongside their human counterparts. In column 10.1–7 after the writer recalls God’s promise to fight for Israel and save it, he breaks out into praise in 10.8 and asks, ‫מיא כמוכה אל‬ ‫ישראל‬: “Who is like you God of Israel?” Next, the writer exclaims, “Who is like Israel whom God has chosen out of all the people of the earth (10.9)? He then goes on to list the characteristics of Israel (10.10–11): ‫עם קדושי ברית ומלומדי חוק משכילי בינ]ה[ ושומעי קול נכבד ורואי‬ ‫מלאכי קודש מגולי אוזן ושומעי עמוקות‬

Israel is a “holy people of the covenant, educated in the statute, and wise in understanding.” Israel acquires understanding because they “hear the glorious voice, they are seers of the holy angels, and their ears are opened to hear the deep things.” Here, the author emphasizes the mediums through which one obtains understanding, and Israel’s chosen status enables them to hear and gaze into the divine sphere. Their understanding comes from the heavenly realm, and thus the author links epistemology, anthropology, and cosmology. Moreover, in 4Q491 Frg.11 col. 1.8–19, also called the Self-Glorification Hymn, the text describes someone existing in the heavenly realms among the gods (1.13, 14, 18). 110 It is difficult to tell to whom the document refers. Does it refer to an angel or to a person who has gained access to the heavenlies? In light of the War Scroll 10.10–11, with its emphasis on Israel as recipients of divine experiences, it is not impossible that in 4Q491 we have to do with a human recipient of divine experiences, one that involves being taken up into heaven itself. If the text does refer to a human being’s experience in the heavenly realms, it corresponds to Israel’s access to the divine sphere in the War Scroll 10.10–11 and provides an additional example of a link between cosmology, epistemology, and anthropology. A human being accesses the divine realm and receives divine instruction. In the War Scroll, knowledge includes God’s ordering of creation, such as the boundaries of the seas and the division of the nations (10.11–16). In 10.16 the author reveals how these things are known: ‫“ אלה ידענו מבינתכה‬These things 4Q491 come from Donald Parry and Emanuel Tov, eds., DSSR Part 1: Texts Concerned with Religious Law (Leiden: Brill, 2004). 110 Duhaime, “War Scroll,” believes that the fragment refers to the angel Michael (86). However, Morton Smith (“Ascent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QMa,” in Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls, JSPSup 8 [Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1990], 181– 188) ascribes the song to a human being who has been taken up into heaven. Cf. John J. Collins, “A Throne in the Heavens: Apotheosis in pre-Christian Judaism” in Death, Ecstasy, and Other Worldly Journeys, eds. John J. Collins and Michael Fishbane (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995), 43–58. Duhaime, “War Scroll,” notes that one of the characteristics that the War Scroll shares with other Qumran literature is its use of ‫אלים‬ (gods) for angels (85).

86

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

we know through your understanding.” Israel, on whom God bestows understanding, now engages in battle alongside God. They have been chosen by God to receive understanding and to participate in the final struggle between God and Belial. In column 11, the author asserts that God fights for the righteous and devours the wicked (cf. 12.8–16; 19.1–14; 4QM2 frg. 1.7–13). In doing so, God shows divine power and makes a name for God’s self among the people (11.1– 14). Although we do not have the completed statement, the author proclaims that God engages in these actions so that “someone” may know divine greatness and holiness (11.15). The author writes: ]‫( ולהתגדל ולהתקדש לעיני שאר הגוים לדעת‬to show yourself great and holy in the eyes of the remnant of the nations, to know). Here, the knowledge people have of God is known through God’s deeds. In this instance, God waging war from the heavens on behalf of the righteous and against evil brings knowledge (11.16–18). Once again the author depicts knowledge as something God bestows, and this time revelation occurs through God’s actions. In the War Scroll, God is present to help in the contest with evil, and an expectation of a final divine rescue exists. For example, in 14.9 the writer declares the manifestation of God’s mercy during the reign of Belial (‫)בממשלת בליעל‬.111 In addition, God has driven away Belial’s spirits and guarded the soul of the redeemed (14.10). Also, in column 17 God has an appointed time for the ultimate defeat of the prince of the dominion of evil (‫ ;שר ממשלת רשעה‬17.5–6). Likewise, the author portrays an eschatological view of knowledge in 17.8, for God sends assistance to the righteous (17.6),112 and when Israel’s dominion becomes reality (17.7–8), righteousness will rejoice, and the sons of truth will take pleasure in everlasting knowledge ‫בדעת עולמים‬ (17.8). Knowledge, then, is not only temporal but something to be enjoyed even in the eschaton. In the present, Israel acquires understanding and is enabled to peer into the divine realm (10.10–11). In 17.8 the author reveals that the knowledge God bestows to Israel has an eternal dimension as well.113 This brief examination of the War Scroll highlights the relationship between understanding, humans’ access to knowledge and the cosmic realm.114 It also shows the importance of cosmic warfare for this document. One of the main 111 My appreciation to Loren Stuckenbruck for calling my attention to this part of the text in which God’s assistance in the struggle with Belial is not completely futuristic. 112 Similarly, in 1QS 3.24–25 God and his Angel of Truth help the sons of light. 113 An eternal dimension to knowledge exists also in 1QHa 11.21c–24. 114 In the War Scroll 13.3 the assembly blesses God and those who serve him in righteousness and know him in steadfastness (‫)כול משרתיו בצדק יודעיו באמונה‬. In 18.10 the writer declares that God knows Israel’s appointed time (‫)ואתה ידעתה למועדנו והיום הופיע לנו‬. Here the writer asserts that knowing God is important for Israel and that a blessing comes upon those who do. In addition, he maintains that God knows Israel intimately and, therefore, knows the time set apart for Israel’s victory.

2.5 The War Scroll

87

differences between the War Scroll and Paul’s language in 2 Corinthians 10– 13 is that the War Scroll depicts a future eschatological battle, whereas Paul depicts himself as engaged in a current conflict. Yet important similarities emerge from this concise survey. In this document, the war encompasses two realms, the human and the suprahuman. The interpenetration of the two spheres becomes apparent as they face off in this conflict. Moreover, the author depicts knowledge as something bestowed by God through a variety of means. The relationship between understanding and the suprahuman realm appears most explicitly in column 10, where the writer emphasizes Israel’s ability to look into and hear the divine realm. In addition, those with knowledge become participants in God’s war with Belial. Likewise, Paul’s claim to training in γνῶσις (2 Cor 11:6) grants him the ability and opportunity to fight alongside God in rescuing the minds of believers and unbelievers. For Paul, the conflict at hand also encompasses human beings and suprahuman beings. The false apostles are really servants of Satan (2 Cor 11:13–15), and the different spirit (2 Cor 11:4) which the Corinthians currently receive is not the same spirit of God they received in the past. The apostle, like the author of the War Scroll, recognizes the two-tiered nature of his struggle. Before leaving the War Scroll, another structural similarity deserves mention. Throughout the text, one finds a repeated emphasis on “the battle is the Lord’s” or the “battle belongs to God” (4.6; 10.4, 6; 11.3; 13.1–3, 7; 14.3–4; 18.6). Remarkably, even though Israel prepares to fight and formations are outlined and instructions given, the ultimate reality for them is that God is the warrior.115 The presence of God’s holy angels (1.10–11; 7.6; 12.1; 15.14; 4Q491 frgs. 1–3 ll. 9–10) in the battle demonstrates God’s agency in Israel’s victory. The author reminds his readers that God fought for Israel in the distant and recent past and this history with God gives renewed hope for the final outcome (11.1–2; 11.13–12.6; 13.4; 14.4–5, 9–11), for while Israel participates in the battle, the outcome is in God’s hands. It is God’s power, not Israel’s, that triumphs. Paul similarly depicts the contest in which he engages. Satan and God square off in the conflict in Corinth. Moreover, the apostle has weapons (2 Cor 10:3–6), even for the right hand and the left (2 Cor 6:7), but his weapons are divinely empowered. God’s power, not Paul’s, enables victory.

115 Duhaime, “War Scroll” recognizes “three kinds of material pertaining to the war: 1) sets of regulations for the preparation and execution of the war; 2) prayers and blessings to be recited according to the different phases of the war; 3) a description of the sequence of the war against the Kittim, including the appropriate speeches and prayers” (80).

88

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

2.6 1QS Treatise of the Two Spirits 3.13–4.26 2.6 1QS

The dynamic interrelationship displayed in the War Scroll between the human and cosmic realms appears in a pronounced way in 1QS, specifically the section of the document known as the Treatise of the Two Spirits (3.13–4.26).116 The author depicts a complex world of spirits warring with each other and within human beings. In 3.13 the writer informs the audience that one of the duties of the maskil is to give instruction and to teach all the sons of light (‫ )כול בני אור‬regarding the nature of all the sons of man (‫)כול בני איש‬.117 This instruction includes educating the sons of light about the different kinds of spirits, the signs of their deeds in their generations (3.14), the visitation of their afflictions, and their times of peace (3.14). The maskil conveys to the sons of light information about two types of spirits and their existence in the nature of a person, as well as the deeds that accompany these spirits. In addition, he is to teach them about the afflictions that the sons of light experience and the rewards that await them in a future time of peace. As is often noted, 3.13–15a comprises the superscript or the heading for this Treatise.118 Here the author lays out the main topic of the work and the function of the instruction. In 15b the writer refers to God as the God of knowledge and underscores the meaning of this title by stating immediately afterward that all that is and will be comes 116 At one time, the treatise existed as a separate document. Scholars are divided as to whether the work is sectarian or pre-sectarian. Note the discussion by Jörg Frey (“Different Patterns of Dualistic Thought in the Qumran Library: Reflections on their Background and History,” in Legal Texts and Legal Issues: Proceedings of the Second Meeting of the International Organization for Qumran Studies, Cambridge 1995, Published in Honour of Joseph M. Baumgarten, eds. Moshe Bernstein, Florentino García Martínez, and John Kampen [Leiden: Brill, 1997]), who believes that 1QS 3.13–4.26 is an independent passage which occurs as an appendix to the liturgical section which precedes it (290); Loren T. Stuckenbruck (“The Interiorization of Dualism within the Human Being in Second Temple Judaism: The Treatise of the Two Spirits (1QS III:13–IV:26) in its Tradition-Historical Context,” in Light Against Darkness: Dualism in Ancient Mediterranean Religion and the Contemporary World, eds. Armin Lange, Eric Meyers, and Randall Styers [Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010]) advocates interpreting the treatise on its own rather than within the context of the Community Rule (161). Charlotte Hempel (“The Treatise on the Two Spirits and the Literary History of the Rule of the Community,” in Dualism in Qumran, ed. Géza G. Xeravits [New York: T&T Clark, 2010]) explores the relationship between the Treatise and the Rule (102– 120). 117 I take this phrase to be universal, applicable to all people, as do a number of scholars. However, Paul Heger (“Another Look at Dualism in Qumran Writings,” in Dualism in Qumran, ed. Géza G. Xeravits [New York: T&T Clark, 2010]) believes that the Treatise refers to the Jews (39–101, especially pages 51, 75–76). 118 The outline presented here basically follows that of Frey, “Different Patterns,” 290 and Stuckenbruck, “Interiorization,” 162. Note also Armin Lange, Weisheit und Prädestination: Weisheitliche Urordnung und Prädestination den Textfunden von Qumran (Leiden: Brill, 1995), 140–143.

2.6 1QS

89

from God. Before humans and spirits existed, God put in place their purposes, and they act according to God’s plan (3.15b–16).119 Although God created humanity for the dominion or rule (‫ ;ממשלה‬3.17) of the world, the spirit of truth and the spirit of unrighteousness that God gives to human beings ultimately end up ruling them (3.20–21). The prince of light has dominion over all the sons of righteousness, while the angel of darkness rules the sons of deceit (3.20–21). However, in 3.22 the writer acknowledges that the angel of darkness also affects the sons of righteousness. This angel is the source of their corruption, sins, iniquities, guilt, and iniquitous deeds. His dominion occurs according to God’s mysteries, and it eventually has an appointed end (3.23). In addition to the list above, the sons of righteousness experience suffering and afflictions because of the angel of darkness (3.23). This angel of darkness not only afflicts the sons of righteousness but also has spirits that affect the sons of light by causing them to stumble (3.24). Fortunately for the sons of light, the God of Israel and his angel of truth provide much-needed assistance in this spiritual conflict (3.24–25). 120 The Treatise of the Two Spirits paints a picture of a continual cosmic wrestling match. Philip Alexander describes the scene well, stating, “The present age is a battlefield between the forces of light and the forces of darkness. This battle, like a game of threedimensional chess, is being waged on a multiplicity of levels –terrestrial and celestial, spiritual and physical.”121 This multidimensional contest to which Alexander refers creates a stark picture of reality. According to the writer of the Τreatise, God loves the spirit of light and hates the spirit of darkness (4.1). In 4.2 the author announces that he will enumerate the ways of both of these spirits. The spirit of light enlightens the heart, makes smooth the paths of righteousness, and creates reverence for God’s precepts (4.2–4). A host of additional attributes for the spirit of light follows this list. Most important for the purposes of this project is that the author characterizes this spirit as a spirit of insight (‫)שכל‬, understanding (‫)בינה‬, wisdom (‫)חכם‬, and knowledge (‫( )דעת‬4.3–4). By contrast, features of the spirit of unrighteousness include wickedness, falsehood, blindness of eyes and deafness, walking in darkness, and craftiness (4.9–11). As humans walk according to either of these spirits, they receive the appropriate rewards. Those who walk according to the spirit of light will have peace and joy (4.6–8), whereas those who follow the spirit of darkness will experience shame (4.13), death (4.14), and afflictions from the angels of destruction (4.12). 119

Cf. 1QS 11.10–11, 17–18; 1QHa 7.15–28, 9.7–9, 19–20. This view of divine assistance is similar to the view of divine assistance in the War Scroll. 121 Philip S. Alexander, “‘Wrestling Against Wickedness in High Places’: Magic in the Worldview of the Qumran Community,” in The Scrolls and the Scriptures: Qumran Fifty Years After, eds. Stanley E. Porter and Craig A. Evans (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1997), 335. 120

90

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

The writer declares that God created the spirits of light and darkness and established every deed upon them (3.25, cf. 3.15–17) and, although the two spirits have God as their origin, they war with each other and are in constant conflict (4.15–25). God appoints these two spirits, the spirits of truth and of unrighteousness (‫ )רוחות האמת והעול‬for every human being (3.18–19). The writer foregrounds the struggle between these two spirits – also called the spirits of light and darkness (‫ ;רוחות אור וחושכ‬3.25) – and then locates this struggle within the heart of man (‫ ;בלבב גבר‬4.23).122 The two spirits of truth and unrighteousness wrestle (‫ )ריב‬within each human being. From the writer’s perspective, humanity is caught within a struggle between powers that originate from outside of humanity (God creates opposing spirits and places opposing spirits within people) and affects both the outside and inside of a person. Though the spirits of light and darkness lie within human beings, outside agents, such as the prince of light, the angel of truth, the angel of darkness and its spirits, affect human beings as well. These agents assist humans, afflict them, or cause them to stumble. As a result, human beings experience conflict within and without, although the inner and outer struggles are intricately connected. This link is aptly articulated by Mladen Popović: In the text as we have it, the psychological realm of the inner person is interconnected with the cosmic realm of supernatural angels and demons, being expressed in and recognizable by human conduct in terms of ethical dualism. This means that the two spirits function on cosmic as well as psychological levels.123

As Popović observes, The Treatise of the Two Spirits conveys a view of the world in which cosmology influences anthropology in profound ways. Outside agents guide human actions, with the result that their existence both present and future depends upon the spirits. People are divided into the two spirit divisions, and the spirits struggle within them, with the result that they either walk in wisdom or foolishness (4.24). Since both spirits fight inside of them, humans act according to the spirits within, and their destiny seems dependent upon God’s predetermined plan (4.22–26).124

122 See also Arthur Everett Sekki, The Meaning of RUAḤ at Qumran, SBLDS 110 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987) who discusses the meaning of ‫ רוה‬in the DSS and Jason Maston’s insightful critique of Sekki’s work in Divine and Human Agency in Second Temple Judaism and Paul: A Comparative Study, WUNT 2/297 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010). Note also the designation of spirit of impurity (‫ )רוח נדה‬in 4.22 for the spirit of unrighteousness. 123 Mladen Popović, “Light and Darkness in the Treatise on the Two Spirits (1QS III 13– IV 26) and in 4Q186,” in Dualism in Qumran, ed. Géza G. Xeravits (New York: T&T Clark, 2010), 154. 124 In the discussion in “Light and Darkness,” Popović appropriately writes, “The Treatise on the Two Spirits is not as clear on the details of this conflict within human beings and the role human actors play in it as one would like it to be” (155n17).

2.6 1QS

91

Despite this grim depiction of battle and conflict within and outside of human beings, the author presents some hope. In several places, he refers to the end of the angel of darkness (3.23), the eradication of unrighteousness (4.18), and the destruction of the spirit of unrighteousness (4.16, 20–21). Most notably, in 4.20–21 the writer declares that God will destroy the spirit of unrighteousness from the innermost parts of man’s flesh.125 This language indicates that the spirit of unrighteousness is seated so deeply within humanity that only God can purify a person from this spirit, and purification takes place through God’s act of cleansing the human being with a spirit of holiness (4.21). The spirit of truth, referred to earlier in the document as warring with the spirit of unrighteousness within the human being, now becomes a cleansing agent in 4.21, where God sprinkles the spirit of truth upon a person to purify him. In light of the author’s reference to a holy spirit earlier in 4.21, it is quite possible that the spirit of truth in 4.21 refers back to the spirit of holiness. If this is the case, then the designation spirit of truth could differ from its earlier usage, or the writer may be introducing the spirit of holiness as a synonym for the often referred to “spirit of truth.” The author also establishes another title in 4.22: spirit of impurity (‫)רוח נדה‬. Here a person is being cleansed from a spirit of unrighteousness which is more than likely a synonym for a spirit of impurity. At any rate, the spirit of holiness and the spirit of truth, like water, act like a purification agent, cleansing a person from the spirit of impurity (4.22). Once a person experiences catharsis, he is ready to receive knowledge of the Most High and to acquire the wisdom of the sons of heaven (4.22). Additionally, in the fragmentary end of 4.26, one finds a possible reference to God granting sons of man knowledge of good and evil. If this reconstruction is correct, then humans attain knowledge of the Most High (4.22), wisdom of the sons of heaven (4.22), and knowledge of good and evil (4.26). Humanity’s understanding is complete, consisting of insight into both heavenly and earthly realms. Indeed, if 4.26 does refer to the knowledge of good and evil, it coheres with the author’s earlier reference in 4.23 to the glory of Adam. What Adam sought will finally be provided. The process of cleansing from an unclean spirit (4.20–21) prior to obtaining knowledge is similar to a theme in 1QHa, where the human being undergoes cleansing first and then is able to obtain knowledge. In both of these documents, purification is necessary before the bestowal of knowledge.126 The implication is that the presence of an evil spirit

125 Loren T. Stuckenbruck, “Jesus’ Apocalyptic Worldview and His Exorcistic Ministry,” in The Pseudepigrapha and Christian Origins: Essays from the Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas, eds. Gerbern S. Oegema and James H. Charlesworth (New York: T&T Clark, 2008), likens this divine action to a “global exorcism, in which anything that remains from the spirit of deceit within human beings will be utterly destroyed” (79). 126 Of course, on a certain level the sons of light have already received some knowledge through the instruction and teaching of the maskil.

92

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

prevents access to divine knowledge, but once God removes this spirit, a person is ready to receive understanding. Furthermore, God as both source of and solution to this conflict continues in 4.22, which states that God chose some people for an everlasting covenant. The context suggests that the chosen consist of the sons of light (3.13, 3.24– 25). They are also called the sons of righteousness (3.20, 22) and the sons of truth (4.5, 6). In 4.23–24 the author acknowledges that the spirits of truth and unrighteousness struggle within all human beings and causes them to walk in wisdom or in foolishness. Due to the influences of these spirits, a person will be both righteous and unrighteous until the appointed end and the new creation (4.25). In the meantime, the two opposing spirits struggle intensely within the human being. The column ends with the recognition that God knows all deeds and is the one who grants people knowledge of good and evil (4.25–26). This summary of the Treatise exposes the intricate relationships between the suprahuman and human realms and points out the binaries within the work. Often characterized as dualism, these contrasts appear in the opposition of truth/unrighteousness, light/darkness, vices/virtues, present age of struggle/future age of peace, and God’s knowledge/human knowledge. Frey notes the presence of cosmic, ethical, and psychological dualism within this section of 1QS. Cosmic dualism entails dividing the world into two opposing forces of good and evil (e.g. Prince of Light/Angel of Darkness).127 Whereas ethical dualism divides people into two groups according to their vices and virtues (e.g. righteousness/wickedness), psychological dualism consists of an internalization of the opposition of good and evil. Thus, the polarity does not occur between two groups of people but between impulses fighting within a person (e.g. struggle of spirits of truth/unrighteousness within human beings). 128 While one can separate out these dualisms for heuristic purposes, they are ultimately deeply intertwined in the document. Noting these connections, Stuckenbruck writes, “These contrasts – operative in the cosmic, ethical, and psychological 127 Frey, “Different Patterns,” 292. Philip S. Alexander (“The Dualism of Heaven and Earth in Early Jewish Literature and its Implications,” in Light Against Darkness: Dualism in Ancient Mediterranean Religion and the Contemporary World, eds. Armin Lange, Eric Meyers, and Randall Styers [Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010]) offers an interesting exploration of cosmological spatial dualism (169–185). 128 Frey, “Different Patterns,” 293–294. Cf. also Stuckenbruck, “Interiorization,” 165– 166. For a different view consult Devorah Dimant (“Qumran Sectarian Literature,” in Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period: Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, Qumran Sectarian Writings, Philo, Josephus, ed. Michael E. Stone [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984]), who believes that differentiating between cosmic and psychological dualism is unnecessary. She writes, “There is no need to distinguish between a cosmic and a psychological dualism as distinct and different types. They may be understood as aspects of the same basic cosmic dualism, which have a necessary counterpart on the moral and psychological level…. Thus the fundamental opposition between the two forces takes place on all levels, in the world at large and ‘in man’s heart’” (535).

2.6 1QS

93

spheres – are inextricably bound up with and modify one another.… The interrelation between the cosmological and anthropological oppositions demonstrates that the Treatise is informed by a more complex frame of understanding.”129 The Treatise’s complex frame of understanding that Stuckenbruck highlights consists of a perception of the world where cosmology forms and determines anthropology. God places spirits within human beings that shape and define their nature, with the result that people act according to the spirits within them.130 Therefore, the struggle that takes place between the two spirits on a cosmic level also occurs within humans. Human beings are indeed the “locus of conflict” 131 and “comprise the battleground where the conflict between opposing spirits is carried out.”132 Consequently, the end of the battle within people corresponds to the end of the battle between the forces on a cosmic level. At the appointed time, God destroys the spirit of unrighteousness and purifies the human’s flesh from this spirit and puts in its place a spirit of truth. The cosmos experiences rest from the turmoil between the two spirits, and so does the inner parts of the human being. 133 The relationship between cosmology, anthropology, and epistemology emerges in several places within the Treatise. As noted above, the spirit of truth illuminates the human heart, grants knowledge, and is called a spirit of knowledge. Once cleansed, the human being is able to receive knowledge of the Most High and to acquire the wisdom of the sons of heaven. Also, the designation of God as a God of knowledge in the opening lines indicates that knowledge is an important theme for the document. God’s foreknowledge regarding all the deeds of humanity and all the deeds of the created spirits is 129

Stuckenbruck, “Interiorization,” 162. Frey, “Different Patterns,” significantly observes that “The specific pattern of dualistic thought combining cosmic, ethical, and psychological dimensions, as developed in the instruction on the two spirits, recurs nowhere else in the Qumran library. Even where the pre-Essene instruction is cited literally or alluded to, its dualistic teaching is not adopted without thorough modifications. The psychological dualism of struggling spirits within any human being is not adopted anywhere else in the Essene literature but seems to be wholly ignored” (306). 131 Stuckenbruck, “Interiorization,” 164. 132 Ibid., 165. 133 In The Self as Symbolic Space: Constructing Identity and Community at Qumran (Leiden: Brill, 2004), Carol Newsom advocates reading 1QS 3–4 in light of Gen. 1 and reading Gen. l in light of 1QS 3–4. If one does this, a new understanding of God’s actions in Genesis emerge. God dividing the light from darkness and naming the light day and the darkness night (Gen. 1:4b–5) takes on a different meaning. “Where formerly [Gen. 1:4b–5] disclosed only God’s organization of the created world, now it alludes as well to an antecedent spiritual reality that informs the structures of creation…. The alternation of day and night becomes a sign on the physical level of the struggle between the spirits of light and darkness which are established ‘in equal measure until the last time’ (1QS 4:16)” (86–87). 130

94

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

significant. The sons of light can find solace in God’s knowledge of both their inner and outer struggles and in the fact that God has planned an end to the conflict. The depiction of God as a God of knowledge underscores divine sovereignty and control. At the same time, it is important to mention that although the sons of light gain knowledge at the end, they also become privy to some features of divine knowledge in the present through the maskil. After all, the maskil instructs them concerning the nature of man, the divine origin of the two spirits, and the spirits’ contest within human beings. Therefore, God allows some elements of the divine plan to become known in the present. Nonetheless, only at the end will the chosen sons of light experience cleansing from the spirit of unrighteousness and thus be able to receive knowledge in the eschaton, specifically the knowledge of good and evil. Both The Treatise of the Two Spirits and 2 Corinthians 10–13 depict a battle between suprahuman figures. For Paul, the battle rages between God and Satan. For the writer of the Treatise, conflict occurs between the angel of darkness and the prince of light and between the spirits of truth and unrighteousness.134 In both documents, suprahuman conflict affects humanity. In the Treatise, the angel of darkness rules the sons of unrighteousness, causes the sons of righteousness to commit evil acts, and causes their suffering. Both godly and ungodly people suffer at the hands of this being. For Paul, evil forces also affect both believers and unbelievers. The god of this age blinds unbelievers and at the same time attempts to corrupt the minds of the Corinthians and lead them astray. Through the false apostles, Satan attempts to turn them away from the gospel of God. A battle rages over every human being in the Treatise, and over every mind in Paul. Furthermore, the relationship between the spirit world and knowledge that appears in Paul also occurs in the Treatise. The spirit of truth/light that struggles with the spirit of unrighteousness/darkness is also a spirit of knowledge and illumination (4.2–4). Once a human being is cleansed from the spirit of unrighteousness, that person can receive knowledge. Moreover, Paul recognizes that a different spirit is at work among the Corinthians, one which they had not formerly received (2 Cor 11:4). The apostle links this different spirit to a different gospel, which provides an additional example of the existence of a cosmic contest within the congregation. Both the writer of the Treatise and Paul conceptualize the agency of human beings as deeply affected by suprahuman agents. They convey an intricate link between cosmology, epistemology, and anthropology. Significant for Paul as well as the author of the Treatise is God’s assistance and presence in combat. In the Treatise the God of Israel and the Angel of 134 Frey, “Different Patterns,” interprets the Treatise at this point in light of 1:16–3:12 where the opposition between God and Belial dominates. For him, since the opposition between the two spirits is found close to the conflict between God and Belial, he believes that the community identified the spirit of wickedness/Angel of Darkness with Belial (301–302).

2.6 1QS

95

Truth aid the sons of light (3.24–25). God’s might empowers Paul’s weapons, and later in 12:9 the apostle informs the Corinthians of the Lord’s words to him: “My grace is enough for you, for power is manifested in weakness.” At the end of the letter, Paul reminds the Corinthians that Jesus too is powerful among them (13:3). Such statements call attention to the significance of God’s power and presence for the cosmic conflict at hand. In addition, in the Treatise and for Paul, God’s action is decisive. At the conclusion of the Treatise, God brings an end to the cosmic and inner struggle (4.18–26). In a similar vein, Paul declares that his divinely empowered weapons will destroy every reasoning, every stronghold, and every high entity being lifted up against the knowledge of God. God’s power defeats all foes. Although the War Scroll portrays a final eschatological battle, the Treatise, like Paul, portrays a battle taking place in the present.135 For the apostle and for the writer of 1QS, human beings participate in a current struggle with spiritual beings. Since humans are no match for the evil forces that vex them, God’s help and assistance are needed. In the War Scroll, equal power exists between Michael and the sons of light and Belial and the sons of darkness. Both achieve three victories until the final seventh battle when, by God’s intervention, Belial’s lot is eradicated. John Collins observes that the equal victories between Michael and Belial have import for the depiction of evil. He writes: The significant point is that the period of struggle is shared equally by the two spirits. This means that evil has a place in the constitution of the world, not merely as a chaos which occasionally erupts, but as an everpresent factor. Up to the time of God’s final intervention evil as well as good has a grip on the universe.136

Whereas Collins’s comments refer to the War Scroll, they relate to the Treatise as well. Evil’s place in the constitution of the world appears prominently in the Treatise. From the beginning, God creates two oppositional spirits whose presence in the world is fundamental to its existence and continues until the end. They are part of creation and even part of human beings’ nature. Good and evil are continually in battle struggling for dominion. Although in the War Scroll evil’s destruction occurs in a final external eschatological battle, in the Treatise the primary battlefield is the internal hearts of people. Destruction of evil takes place when God purifies the sons of light and removes the spirit of unrighteousness from the inner parts of their flesh, bestowing upon them purity and the spirit of truth.137 In each case, God brings

135

For a fuller discussion on the differences between the Treatise of the Two Spirits and the War Scroll, consult Frey, “Different Patterns,” 310–313. 136 John J. Collins, “The Mythology of Holy War in Daniel and the Qumran War Scroll: A Point of Transition in Jewish Apocalyptic” VT 25 (1975): 608. 137 Jutta Leonhardt-Balzer, “Evil, Dualism and Community: Who/What Did the YAHAD Not Want to Be?,” in Dualism in Qumran, ed. Géza G. Xeravits (New York: T&T Clark,

96

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

evil to an end. Like the writers of these texts, Paul envisages humans wrestling with suprahuman forces. It is a battle that humans cannot win in their own strength but one that requires divine assistance and intervention. The apostle’s insistence that he relies upon God’s power and not his own suggests that his perspective is similar to the one found in these texts. In cosmic warfare, God’s power, not human power, triumphs over evil.

2.7 Excursus: An Additional Word on the War Scroll, The Treatise of the Two Spirits, and Paul The War Scroll and The Treatise of the Two Spirits, along with Paul, depict a profound struggle within the spirit world. The writers of the War Scroll and the Treatise perceived that something was fundamentally wrong with the cosmos and with humanity. They understood human existence, in some sense, as in conflict with the spiritual world, whether this battle involved a present ongoing struggle or one expected in the future. For them, evil, to use Collins’s phrase, had a “grip on the universe.”138 Paul stands within such traditions, as evidenced by his language. For him, a current war rages even though Christ’s death and resurrection has occurred. In one sense, it could be said that Paul stands in a time before the Christ event. Satan rages on, and evil still seems to reign. After all, the god of this age blinds unbelievers, deceives believers, and heaps suffering upon the righteous. Yet Paul does stand in a post-resurrection period in which evil has been decisively defeated but not yet totally eradicated. On one level, Paul shares with the writers of the War Scroll and the Treatise the notion of what it means to live in a time in which one experiences the rampant nature of evil but at the same time knows it will be ultimately removed. For example, in the War Scroll, the depiction of three defeats of the sons of light by Belial and the sons of darkness portrays human existence in a period when evil wins. The Sons of Darkness afflict Israel and, as a result, Israel experiences casualties (16.11–14; 4Q491 frg. 10 2.7–14). Even so, God does not abandon Israel but remains with them during the struggle and acts on their behalf by bestowing mercy and driving back the spirits of Belial (14.9–11). Similarly, the current internal and external struggle endured by the sons of light in the Treatise includes living in a period when the presence of evil seems equal to the presence of righteousness. Here too, the author writes of God’s assistance in the middle of the contest (1QS 3.24–25). Along with an acknowledgement of God’s presence and aid in combat, in both documents there is a 2010), views the spirit of truth’s purifying activity as a “cultic rendition of the biblical story of the flood, which has the aim to restore mankind to the ‘glory of Adam’” (136). 138 Collins, “The Mythology of Holy War,” 608.

2.8 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document

97

“looking forward,” a promise of God’s final defeat of evil. Paul also shares this “looking forward” during a period of evil (Gal 1:4), as exhibited in 1 Corinthians 15:24–26: “Then the end, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father, when he has destroyed every ruler and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has placed all enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death.” Paul and the writers of the War Scroll and the Treatise of the Two Spirits share a world in which they live in the midst of evil and evil’s apparent triumphs while at the same time awaiting eschatological victory. Yet it is important to note that while a cosmic war continues and Paul participates in such traditions of thought, the vantage point from which one sees this war radically shifts. Now one views the battlefield from the hill of Golgotha through the lens of Christ’s death and resurrection, a viewpoint not available to the writers of the War Scroll and the Treatise. What does it mean that God now engages in battle armed with a cross, a crucified Christ, and a weak, wounded, and besieged apostle? Indeed, the battle rages on. The participants remain more or less the same (God, Satan/Satanic figure, spirits, angels and humanity), but the topography of the war’s landscape is somehow forever changed. God in Christ enters humanity’s subjection and vulnerability to the spirit world and, by doing so, transforms the lines of the battlefield. Now the God who fights the powers of evil is the “God in Christ reconciling the world to himself” (2 Cor 5:19). Thus, the proleptic event of evil’s final annihilation to which the Flood points,139 and which the writers of the War Scroll and the Treatise long for and anticipate, finds its assured execution in the cross. As the authors of the War Scroll and the Treatise demonstrate, God does not abandon humanity in this ongoing cosmic warfare. And to their voices Paul adds his own. The cross exhibits God’s continued struggle with and for humanity and the world.

2.8 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document 2.8 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document

The previous examination of the War Scroll and The Treatise of the Two Spirits demonstrates the existence of important correspondences to Paul’s connection of epistemology with cosmology and anthropology. Such intersections also appear in 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document. In both 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document, suprahuman beings hinder or facilitate humans’ knowledge of God. Paul’s language and outlook share “conceptual affinities” with the writers of these texts, illustrating that he participates in a “complex web of traditions” 139

I am indebted to Loren Stuckenbruck for the notion of viewing the Flood event in this manner as well as for the idea of thinking about the significance of time in these documents and Paul.

98

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

in which the world consists of a dynamic interaction between the realms of the human and the suprahuman.140 2.8.1 Community Hymns Scholars normally divide 1QHa into two types of hymns, the Community Hymns and the Teacher Hymns.141 The present discussion will begin with the Community Hymns but will also look at portions of both categories and their correspondence with Paul’s language in 2 Corinthians.142 In the Community Hymns, one finds a recurring depiction of human beings as beings of dust, clay, and flesh. In several places, the writer bemoans the plight of humans as merely creatures of clay. For this writer, humanity’s fleshliness or “clayliness” prohibits it from attaining knowledge of God. 143 In addition, humanity’s situation allows it to be placed under the power of spirits opposed to God. The need for divine protection from these spirits and for divine assistance to access knowledge of God appears in a variety of places in these texts. ‫[ עבדך מחטוא לך ומכשול בכול דברי רצונך חזק מתנ]יו לעמו[ד על רוחות‬ ‫ולה[ תהלך בכול אשר אהבתה ולמאוס בכול אשר שנאתה ]ולעשות[ הטוב בעיניך‬ [ ] [ ] ‫ממ[שלתם בתכמו כי רוח בשר עבדך‬

] ] ]

4.35 [ ] your servant from sinning against you and from stumbling ֹin all the matters of your will. Strengthen [ ] against spirits 4.36 [and that he may] walk in all that you love and despise all that [you] hate [that he may do] what is good in your eyes 4.37 [ ] their rule in his inward parts for your servant is a spirit of flesh.144 ‫וברזי שכלכה פלג]תה[ כול אלה להודיע כבודך ]כי מה ה[יא רוח בשר להבין‬

140 The idea of conceptual affinity derives from M. C. de Boer, “Paul and Apocalyptic Eschatology,” The Encyclopedia of Apocalypticism, ed. John J. Collins (New York: Continuum, 1998), 1:347, and the phrase “complex web of traditions” comes from Stuckenbruck, “Demonic Beings and the Dead Sea Scrolls,” 122. 141 The Community Hymns consist of columns 1–9 and 18–28; the Teacher Hymns include columns 10–17. See Eileen M. Schuller and Carol A. Newsom, The Hodayot (Thanksgiving Psalms): A Study Edition of 1QHa (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2012), 3 and also Hartmut Stegemann with Eileen Schuller, 1QHodayota, DJD XL (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), where Eileen Schuller writes, “The groundbreaking work of Gert Jeremias and Heinz-Wolfgang Kuhn that established the categories of ‘Hymns of the Teacher’ and ‘Hymns of the Community’ now needs to be re-evaluated, and almost certainly refined, in light of the totality of the reconstructed scroll and the new materials preserved in the cave 4 copies” (10–11). 142 For the subsequent discussion of 1QHa, I am indebted to the work of Shane Berg, “Religious Epistemologies in the Dead Sea Scrolls: The Heritage and Transformation of the Wisdom Tradition” (PhD diss., Yale University, 2008). 143 I recognize the possibility that these hymns may have been written by more than one author. However, I will refer to the author in the singular for the sake of this discussion. 144 The Hebrew text, column and line enumeration comes from Stegemann with Schuller, 1QHodayota. Translations of 1QHa are the author’s unless otherwise noted.

2.8 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document

99

‫בכול אלה ולהשכיל בס ] [גדול ומה ילוד אשה בכול ]ג[ד]ו[ל]י[ך הנוראים והוא‬ ‫מבנה עפר ומגבל מים א]שמה וחט[אה סודו ערות קלון ומ]קור הנ[דה ורוח נעוה משלה בו‬ 5.30 And in the mysteries of your insight [you] divided all these things to reveal your glory [how then is] a spirit of flesh to understand 5.31in all these things and to gain great [ ]? And what is a person birthed by a woman among all your [splendid] works? He is 5.32 built from dust and fashioned from water so [sinful guiltiness] is his foundation, shame of dishonor, and s[ource of] impurity and a spirit of corruption rules 5.33 over him. ‫אלה ידעתי מבינתכה כיא גליתה אוזני לרזי פלא ואני יצר החמר ומגבל המים‬ ‫סוד הערוה ומקור הנדה כור העוון ומבנה החטאה רוח התועה ונעוה בלא‬ ‫בינה ונבעתה במשפטי צדק‬ 9.23 These things I know from understanding for you uncovered my ears to extraordinary mysteries (even though) I am made from clay, fashioned from water, 9.24 a foundation of shame, a fountain of impurity, a furnace of iniquity, a building of sin, a spirit of error, and corruption without 9.25 understanding and terrified by righteous judgments.

In these quotations, a number of significant features appear. First, human beings’ fleshliness contributes to their finiteness and their propensity towards sin. Their composition hinders knowledge of God because flesh forms a barrier to knowing God. The writer in 5.30 wonders how a human can even understand God’s great counsel, since a human is a “spirit of flesh.” In 7.34 the writer, echoing this sentiment, declares, “What, indeed, is flesh to understand [these things]? How is a being of dust able to direct its steps?”145 Such questions highlight the author’s view of humanity’s helplessness to gain knowledge and the inability of a human being to control her or his own life. Column 5.32 presents an additional look at a causal relationship between composition and sin. Because humans are made from dust and water, sin and impurity come to have dominion over them. 146 Indeed, a spirit of corruption rules.147 Just as humans’ composition makes them susceptible to evil forces, it also affects their ability to access knowledge since flesh cannot understand. In 9.23–25 the writer proclaims that he is a list of things, “I am:” 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7)

Made from clay Fashioned from water A Foundation of shame A Fountain of impurity A Furnace of iniquity A Building from sin A Spirit of error

145

‫ומה אף הוא בשר כי ישכיל ]באלה ויצ[ר עפר איך יוכל להכין צעדו‬ Berg, “Religious Epistemologies,” refers to this bleak description of humanity as “pessimistic anthropology” (5). Note also the important discussion in Maston, Divine and Human Agency, 81–86, 88–94. 147 Cf. 1QS 3.20–23. 146

100

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

8) A Spirit of Corruption without understanding With this list of attributes, the writer shifts from what we find in column 5, in which sin and corruption dominate human beings, to what we find here in column 9: the human being becomes identified with ungodly attributes and the spirit that only rules him in 5.32–33. Thus, the picture of the human being in these texts is bleak to say the least. The writer emphasizes humans as made from clay and water, which subsequently leaves them susceptible to sin, impurity, and a spirit of error and corruption. At the same time, this composition allows them to be completely taken over to such an extent that the human becomes identified with these spirits.148 However, column 9.23 portrays a transformed view of what we find in 5.30– 32 and 7.34. The transformed element appears at the beginning of 9.23. The writer declares that he has gained understanding through a divine action of God. Although he characterizes himself as ‫לא בינה‬, now he declares that ‫ידעתי‬ ‫מבינתכה‬. John Levison also notes the profound depiction of God’s act. He writes, Throughout these hymns, then, above the din of human depravity and ignorance rises the melody of divine graciousness. Though human beings are creatures of clay, spirits that are nothing more than depravity and error, God gives to them – those who join the community – purity and knowledge. 149

While the hymnist is aware of all of these negative attributes, he also recognizes that God’s power prevails over his fleshly constitution and the opposing spirits. Here, a connection between cosmology, anthropology, and epistemology is depicted in a profound way. God, despite their human constitution and limitation, grants humans knowledge and understanding. 150 Moreover, one finds in 9.28b–29, the writer’s recognition of a deep divide between God and humanity. The author writes, “And to you, you, God of knowledge (are) all the deeds of righteousness and foundation of truth, (but) to the sons of Adam (are) the service of iniquity and the deeds of unrighteousness.”151 The writer describes God as a God of knowledge who knows righteousness and truth while human beings engage in iniquitous, deceitful acts.152 The writer’s declaration of God as a God of knowledge comes after his previous statement in 9.23 where he states that he has gained understanding through God’s act. Only the God of knowledge can bestow understanding to those who work deceit. The phrase ‫ בני האדם‬may be an implicit reference to the author’s 148 John Levison, Filled with the Spirit (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), believes that Gen 2:7 forms the background for 9.23–25. The spirit once breathed into the human being has now “metamorphosed into ‘a spirit of error and depravity without knowledge” (204). 149 Ibid., 205. 150 See also Maston, Divine and Human Agency, 113–117. 151 ‫לכה אתה הדעות כול מעשי הצדקה וסוד האמת ולבני האדם עבודת העוון ומעשי הרמיה‬ 152 Cf. 1QS 3.15 ‫מאל הדעות כול הויה ונהייה‬

2.8 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document

101

earlier language about humans being made of clay and dust (5.32; 7.34; 9.23); humans take on the form of their ancestor Adam. If this is the case, then here again the author links humanity’s composition to its connection to iniquity and deceit.153 In addition, the writer contrasts the ‫ מעשי‬of righteousness which God knows and the ‫ מעשי‬of deceit which belongs to the human, the son of Adam. The repetition of this word serves to heighten the distance between God and the sons of Adam, and the antitheses of truth and deceit indicate a grave contrast between the two. In several places, prior to 9.27, the author makes statements regarding the ‫ סוד‬of humans, which is sinful guiltiness (5.32) and shame (9.24). In 9.28–29 the ‫ סוד‬of truth belongs to the Lord, another indicator of the writer’s perspective that a chasm exists between God and humanity. 154 This depiction of the gulf between God and humans signifies the extreme predicament of humanity and the need for divine intervention on its behalf. A second observation from the passages discussed thus far includes the presentation of the fleshly makeup of the human being. This makeup precipitates a situation in which sin, impurity, and spirits of corruption and error can control humans. The connection the author creates between human composition and human susceptibility to evil appears explicitly in 4.35, where the writer asks God to strengthen against spirits because God provides the necessary power to resist these entities. The implicit perspective behind this request is that humans need divine assistance when it comes to evil spirits because they cause humans to engage in ungodly actions. 155 When humanity receives assistance from God, it is empowered to live a life that aligns with divine principles. Moreover, the last line of the quotation highlights why humans need God’s assistance and intervention. God’s servant is a spirit of flesh and as such cannot deal with spirits on its own. Flesh is a barrier for humans to grasp knowledge of God and makes them susceptible to the spirit world. The survey of these passages demonstrates that these texts convey a profound sense of humanity’s vulnerability to the spirit world. It also indicates that the belief in spirits’ ability to rule humans and to hinder knowledge existed 153 The phrase “sons of Adam” could also be an implicit reference to the Genesis story. If so, the author alludes to how humanity comes to be in this particular predicament in the first place. Although the serpent promised knowledge, 9.26 declares that God has the knowledge of righteousness and truth, whereas Adam’s descendants experience iniquity and deceit. 154 Dimant, “Qumran Sectarian Literature,” writes about the bleak picture of the human being in 1QHa: “The Hodayot depict man as weak and base by nature, inclined to sin and treachery and void of knowledge; he was made out of dust and water, and born out of a woman’s womb” (537). 155 As we have seen, the idea that humans need assistance when dealing with suprahuman beings occurs in the War Scroll and 1QS. In the War Scroll, God and the angels assist the sons of light (e.g. 7.6; 12.1, 4–5; 14.9; 4Q491 frgs. 5–6). In 1QS, the God of Israel and his Angel of Truth aid the sons of light (3.24).

102

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

in some strands of Jewish thought. Significantly, humans receive knowledge of God through divine action. Each of these themes also exists in 2 Corinthians. As discussed, Paul believes that suprahuman powers affect humans and their knowledge of God (2 Cor 4:4; 10:5; 11:3; 12:7). He also believes that God bestows knowledge on humanity (2 Cor 4:6; 11:6). Paul’s perspective involves a wider cultural discourse in which the spirit world affects humanity and its knowledge of God. 2.8.2 The Aramaic Levi Document156 The author of the Aramaic Levi Document (ALD) expresses sentiments similar to those in the Community Hymns.157 Μάκρυνον ἀπ’ ἐµοῦ, κύριε, τὸ πνεῦµα τὸ ἄδικον καὶ διαλογισµὸν τὸν πονηρὸν (διαλογισµῶν τῶν πονηρῶν) καὶ πορνείαν, καὶ ὕβριν ἀπόστρεφον ἀπ’ ἐµοῦ. ∆ειχθήτω µοι, δέσποτα, τὸ πνεῦµα τὸ ἅγιον, καὶ βουλὴν καὶ σοφὶαν καὶ γνῶσιν καὶ ἰσχὺν δός µοι Ποιῆσαι τὰ (τό) ἀρέσκοντά σοι καὶ εὑρεῖν χάριν ἐνώπιόν σου καὶ αἰνεῖν τοὺς λόγους σου µετ’ ἐµοῦ, κύριε Καὶ µὴ κατισχυάτω µε πᾶς σατανᾶς πλανῆσαί µε ἀπὸ τῆς ὁδοῦ σου. Καὶ ἐλέησόν µε καὶ προσάγαγέ µε εἶναι σου δοῦλος καὶ λατρεῦσαί σοι καλῶς. Make far away from me, Lord, the unrighteous spirit, and evil reasoning [reasonings of evil] and sexual immorality, and pride turn away from me. Let the holy spirit be shown to me, master, and give to me counsel and wisdom and knowledge and strength To do the things pleasing to you and to find grace before you and to praise your words with me, Lord. And do not let any satan rule over me to lead me astray from your path.

156 The Prayer of Levi is part of the Aramaic Levi Document, which Michael E. Stone and Jonas C. Greenfield (“The Prayer of Levi,” JBL 112 [1993]: 247–266) date to the 3rd century BC or very early 2nd century BC. Cf. also Jonas C. Greenfield, Michael E. Stone, and Esther Eshel, eds., The Aramaic Levi Document: Edition, Translation, Commentary, SVTP 19 (Leiden: Brill, 2004), 19–22. Henryk Drawnel, An Aramaic Wisdom Text from Qumran: A New Interpretation of the Levi Document (Leiden: Brill, 2004) places the date of the document from the end of the 4th century BC to the early years of the 3rd century BC (71). 157 This excerpt from the prayer consists of the Greek compilation that appears in Stone and Greenfield, “The Prayer of Levi,” 258 and Greenfield, Stone, and Eshel, Aramaic Levi Document, 60–63. “The Prayer of Levi” occurs in two witnesses: 4QTLevia, which is an Aramaic manuscript; and a Greek document following the Testament of Levi in manuscript e of the Greek Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. The Aramaic Levi Document (ALD) is the title given to 4QTLevia. According to Stone and Greenfield, the Greek and Aramaic texts overlap, with a few Aramaic lines preceding and following the Greek parallel material. They state that this overlap indicates that the Greek version of the prayer is a translation of part of the Aramaic (247). See the discussion in Stone and Greenfield, “The Prayer of Levi,” 247– 255.

2.8 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document

103

And have mercy on me and bring me near to be your slave and to serve you well.158

In this prayer, one finds a petition similar to the one in 1QHa 4.35 in which the writer prays to be strengthened against spirits. Here also, in the ALD, the writer prays for protection from an unrighteous spirit and makes a connection between spirits, thoughts, and actions. He links an unrighteous spirit with an evil reasoning and ungodly action, whereas he connects the holy spirit with counsel, wisdom, and knowledge.159 The following chart highlights the oppositional nature of Levi’s prayer: Make far from me The unrighteous spirit And evil thought And sexual immorality And pride turn away from me

Show me The holy spirit And counsel And wisdom And knowledge And give strength to do The things pleasing to you 160

Jonas Greenfield, Michael Stone, and Esther Eshel note the “contrastive style” of this petition writing that “this is certainly one of the oldest passages in which two spirits are contrasted and, if a third century BCE date for ALD is accepted, then this concept, so characteristic of the Qumran texts, must be put back to that date.”161 As these interpreters observe, the language of this text suggests a perspective in which two opposing spirits affect the petitioner.162 Similar to the Community Hymns, the prayer portrays human vulnerability to the spirit world and connects the spirit world with divine insight. The writer asks that God not allow any satan to rule (‫ ;שלט‬κατισχυάτω) over him lest he stray from God’s path: ‫]ו [אל תשלט בי כל שטן‬.163 Such a statement by

158

Using the line demarcations of Stone and Greenfield, “The Prayer of Levi,” this excerpt consists of lines 7–11 and passage 3:5–10 in Greenfield, Stone, and Eshel, Aramaic Levi Document, 61–63 and is modified with respect to translation. 159 Stone, Greenfield, and Eshel, Aramaic Levi Document, 128 and Drawnel, An Aramaic Wisdom Text, 214 believe that Is 11:2 is the background for the list of counsel, wisdom, knowledge, and strength. 160 This chart comes from Greenfield, Stone, and Eshel, Aramaic Levi Document, 33, and is modified with respect to translation. 161 Ibid., 33. So also Drawnel, An Aramaic Wisdom Text, who writes, “This moral and spiritual dualism is probably one of the earliest sketches of this sort in the literature of the Second Temple Period” (213). 162 Note the similarity to the concept of the competing spirits of truth and unrighteousness in 1QS. The Aramaic term ‫( ארחק‬Make far) appears in reference to an exorcism in an amulet from the Byzantine era. Consult the brief discussion in Greenfield, Stone, and Eshel, Aramaic Levi Document, 127. 163 The notion of evil spirits ruling humans occurs also in 1QS 3.20–23; 1QHa 5.32–33.

104

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

the author implies that πᾶς σατανᾶς (‫ )כל שטן‬refers to any evil spirit who attempts to lead one away from God.164 The formulation ‫ כל שטן‬in ALD demonstrates that ‫ שטן‬is not a proper noun.165 Stone and Greenfield maintain that “[The phrase] ‘let not any satan have power over me’ … implies the idea that demons were a threat” and also “the use of ‘satan’ with the distributive implies more than one, meaning that ‘satan’ is a category of evil spirit and not a proper name.”166 Like the author in 1QHa 4.35, this petitioner asks God for help with evil forces, acknowledging that God’s power has the ability to deal with satanic attack perpetrated against human beings. While this prayer does not contain a negative account of flesh as found in the Community Hymns, nonetheless, its language of unrighteous spirit, evil reasoning, holy spirit, wisdom, knowledge, and satan, coupled with an implicit view of human vulnerability to the spirit world, highlight the integration of cosmology, epistemology, and anthropology. The dire predicament of humanity precipitates the need for divine intervention to protect from evil spirits and to grant knowledge. This observation leads to a third point from these excerpts. For the writers of these hymns and of ALD, God is the source of knowledge. Although the writer of ALD does not state this notion explicitly, his request to God for wisdom and knowledge implies that such is the case. God and God’s spirit are the sources of knowledge, and without the divine granting γνῶσις the petitioner will not acquire it. As discussed previously, in 1QHa 9.23 God’s mysteries have been granted to God’s servant despite the servant being fashioned from clay. Flesh is a barrier to gaining knowledge, but God overcomes the barrier that humans cannot overcome themselves. In 1QHa 9.23 God bestows knowledge directly, but in other places in the hymns and in ALD, intermediaries play a role. Knowledge occurs through God’s holy spirit or through other spirits. ‫] ו[דברך לא ישוב אחור ואני עבדך ידעתי‬ [ ]‫ברוח אשר נתתה בי‬ 5.35b [and ] your word does not turn back and I your servant know 5.36 by the spirit which you put in me […] ‫ותשנא עולה לעד ואני עבדך חנותני ברוח דעה ל]בחור בא[מת‬

164

Stone and Greenfield, “The Prayer of Levi,” 262. Greenfield, Stone, and Eshel, Aramaic Levi Document, 129–130. A similar use of satan occurs in 1QHa 22.6; 1QHa 24.23; 1 Enoch 40.7; 65.6. Also cited by Stone and Greenfield, “The Prayer of Levi,” 262; Greenfield, Stone, and Eshel, Aramaic Levi Document, 129–130. 166 Stone and Greenfield, “The Prayer of Levi,” 262. According to Greenfield, Stone, and Eshel, Aramaic Levi Document, the early date for ALD marks this passage as a “very early stage of the development of Jewish apotropaic prayers” (130). 165

2.8 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document

105

6.36 and you hate unrighteousness forever and I your servant you have shown favor by a spirit of knowledge [to choose] truth ∆ειχθήτω µοι, δέσποτα, τὸ πνεῦµα τὸ ἅγιον, καὶ βουλὴν καὶ σοφὶαν καὶ γνῶσιν καὶ ἰσχὺν δός µοι Ποιῆσαι τὰ ἀρέσκοντα σοι καὶ εὑρεῖν χάριν ἐνώπιόν σου καὶ αἰνεῖν τοὺς λόγους σου µετ’ ἐµοῦ, κύριε v. 7 Let the holy spirit be shown to me, master, and counsel and wisdom and knowledge and give strength to me To do the things pleasing to you and to find grace before you and to praise your words with me, Lord. (Aramaic Levi Document)

As creatures of clay, humans need divine intervention to access knowledge of God. As these excerpts show, spirits are given to human beings to facilitate this process. The spirit world contains evil spirits that afflict humans and rule over them, such as satans in ALD, as well as spirits from God that assist human beings in the quest for divine understanding. These writings portray humanity’s agency as dependent upon outside agents, especially when it comes to knowledge. 2.8.3 Paul, 1QHa (Community Hymns), and the Aramaic Levi Document Throughout this section, the emphasis on humanity’s agency as affected by outside forces has been underscored. However, it is important to note that in 1QHa one does find strands within the text in which humans display some type of agency. For example, in 7.31–32 the writer declares that the wicked reject God’s covenant and choose what God hates. They have a choice and are not simply devoid of the ability to act. At the same time, however, he writes in 7.30 and 7.25–26 respectively that God predestines them for the day of slaughter and that God directs the path of every human being. For this writer, human agency and God’s sovereignty form a complex reality. In a similar vein, in column 18, he relates the utter dependence of humanity upon God, declaring boldly that nothing happens apart from God (18.11). Furthermore, he contends that God is the ruler of every spirit. This assertion accentuates God’s power over all spirits (18.10), suggesting that this power is also over spirits of corruption and error. The presence of these statements highlights the tension between the spirit world, human agency, and God’s sovereignty in these writings, a friction that the author does not resolve but allows to stand side by side.167 This tension also exists in Paul. The apostle recognizes the susceptibility of the Corinthians to deception but still admonishes them to test themselves to

167 Perhaps it is anachronistic to suggest that these views denote a tension. The author may not have seen this as a conflict at all but simply realized that reality is much too complex to depict in just one way. At any rate, the idea that humans are susceptible to sin and spirits (both good and bad) plays a significant role in the author’s view of the world.

106

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

make sure they are still in faith (13:5). While outside agents affect the Corinthians, Paul nevertheless regards his hearers as addressable because of the Spirit of God and, therefore, able through divine assistance to examine themselves.168 Similar to 1QHa, where the petitioner receives knowledge through spirits that come from God, Paul views God’s Spirit as a source of knowledge and revelation. In 1 Corinthians 2:10–14, the apostle speaks of things revealed and taught by God’s Spirit and thus shares with these writers a view of the cosmos in which suprahuman forces affect and influence human beings’ access to divine knowledge. 169 Paul and the writers of 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document articulate some shared perspectives: 1) the susceptibility of human beings to evil forces, 2) the view that God is the source of knowledge and humans are incapable of knowing God without divine intervention, and 3) the connection between the suprahuman world and knowledge. Paul’s language about the god of this age blinding unbelievers in 4:4, the Corinthians being deceived in 11:3, and references to Satan and satanic ministers in 11:13–14 illustrates his view that evil forces are at work seeking to dominate believers and unbelievers alike, especially in obstructing knowledge of God.170 168

Martyn, Galatians, uses the phrase “addressable communities” to speak of the imperatives Paul directs to the Galatian churches. He writes, “Through the invasive Spirit, then, God has created and continues to create the Galatian churches as addressable communities, communities that are able to hear God’s imperative because of the indwelling Spirit” (535; emphasis his). Yet Martyn’s observations are just as appropriate for the Corinthian congregation. Here, too, Paul assumes the Spirit’s presence in this community. In 2 Cor 1:21 and in 2 Cor 5:5, he writes that the Spirit is given by God as a first installment or guarantee (cf. 1 Cor 2:10–13). The imperative, then, that Paul gives the Corinthians in 13:5 to test themselves presupposes a history with the Spirit. It is a history that he hopes will continue, as he writes in 13:13. 169 In “Sin’s Corruption of the Knowledge of God and the Law in Romans 1–8,” in The Unrelenting God: God’s Action in Scripture: Essays in Honor of Beverly Roberts Gaventa (eds. David J. Downs and Matthew L. Skinner [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2013]), Shane Berg writes of 1 Cor 2:6–16, “Paul’s religious epistemology as articulated in this passage contains a robust notion of divine agency – God’s work in the Holy Spirit is necessary for a right knowledge of God’s work in Christ” (120). And again, “The failure of human knowledge to lead to its proper end is only overcome when Christ breaks the power of sin and God gives the Spirit to those who come to believe in him” (137–138). 170 In the Community Hymns, “knowledge of God” involves knowledge about the world, the stars, and God’s ordering of the cosmos. In Paul, “knowledge of God” refers to the gospel: God’s saving act in the Christ event. For example, in 1 Cor 15:34, in the context of his discussion about the reality of the resurrection, Paul states that some people have no knowledge of God. This suggests that for Paul Christ’s resurrection and resurrection of believers is part of the knowledge of God. For the apostle, then, knowledge of God entails the Christ event and everything that event brings about, including the final annihilation of death and the resurrection of believers. Garrett, “The God of This World and the Affliction of Paul,” says it well: “As ‘god of this age,’ Satan blinds the minds of some of Paul’s hearers,

2.8 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document

107

Both 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document speak of spirits as agents of knowledge. A holy spirit is an agent of knowledge, but there are other spirits at work as well that provide knowledge of God, such as the spirit of knowledge in 6.36 of 1QHa. At one point, the writer praises God for the spirits: “[Blessed are you God of compassion] for the spirits which you placed in me. And I will find an answer on (my) tongue to recount your righteous acts and your patience” (4.29).171 It is these spirits that allow the hymnist’s community to know God and to attain the wonderful mysteries of God. Apart from this divine assistance in the form of a holy spirit or in the form of other divine spirits, knowledge of God lies outside of human reach.172 2.8.4 Teacher Hymns Similar to the Community Hymns in 1QHa, Paul attributes humanity’s ability to access knowledge of God or receive knowledge from God to divine assistance. In 2 Corinthians 10–13 Paul engages in another profound depiction of himself, portraying himself as an agent of divine revelation (2 Cor 10:5; 11:6; 12:1–10; cf. 2:14–17; 4:5–15). This view is comparable to what we find in the Teacher Hymns, where the Teacher becomes God’s means of revelation to God’s people. The following examination of the Teacher Hymns will begin by focusing on the Teacher’s presentation of himself as an agent of revelation and then proceed by illustrating Paul’s presentation of himself in an analogous manner. The reason for this exploration is not to argue that Paul deliberately casts himself in the role of the Teacher or to prove that he read these hymns.173 Rather, these hymns provide an additional point of comparison with Paul’s own language as it relates to cosmology, epistemology, and anthropology. The Teacher Hymns highlight the importance of the suprahuman realm with respect to knowledge, especially as it pertains to one who depicts himself as God’s representative. Paul’s language and the language of the Teacher emphasize divine agency and the significance of God’s action in the revelatory process. In column 10 of 1QHa, the writer tells God, “You have set me as a reproach and an object of derision to the treacherous ones, a foundation of truth and understanding to the ones on the straight path” (10.11c–10.12).174And again in

lest they perceive that Christ died to rescue them from the age’s dominion (cf. Gal. 1:4). Now that the crucifixion and resurrection have occurred, Satan engages in ‘damage containment.’ He strives to keep as many as possible from escaping his dominion and seizes every opportunity to capture one of the saved (2 Cor 2:11; cf. T. Dan 6:3–4)” (104–105). 171 ‫]ברוך אתה אל הרחמי[ם מרוחות אשר נתתה בי וא]מ[צאה מענה לשון לספר צדקותיך וארוך אפים‬ 172 A holy spirit is also depicted as an agent of purification in 8.30. Cf. 1QS 3.21. 173 This statement holds true for the other texts examined in this project as well. I am not arguing that Paul read any of these texts. 174 ‫ותשימני חרפה וקלס לבוגדים סוד אמת ובינה לישרי דרך‬

108

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

10.15, the writer states, “And you made me a sign for the chosen of righteousness and a conveyor of knowledge of your supreme mysteries.”175 In 9.28b–29 of 1QHa knowledge of every work of righteousness as well as the foundation of truth belong to God. Here in column 10, the Teacher declares that he is a foundation of truth and a conveyor of knowledge through God’s design; God places the Teacher in this position, for the Teacher becomes a partner in God’s revelatory project.176 Moreover, the author acknowledges that his status appears differently to two groups of people. To one group he is a reproach and an object of scorn, yet to another group he is a foundation of truth and knowledge. However, in both cases, God’s hand brings about these opposite effects.177 Column 10 of 1QHa provides a glimpse of the opposition to the Teacher in which he faces fierce enemies, and in some places, he depicts the opposition in military terms.178 The writer creates a stark dichotomy between himself and those who oppose him declaring that these mediators of deceit lure people away, bring them to ruin, to a state in which they lack understanding (12.8). While the Teacher assists in granting knowledge, his opponents’ actions produce the opposite effect. Furthermore, as mediators and seers of deceit, his opponents attempt to exchange the Torah for flattering teachings (12.11–12). Their actions derive from Belial, signifying to whom they belong and that they do not stand in God’s truth (10.22–24). The writer contends that those who belong to Belial wage war against those who belong to God and against divine knowledge through deception and lies. For this author, an indisputable link exists between knowledge and God and between knowledge and Belial. Humanity is part of this contest, since agents of Belial seek to deceive it and lead it astray, whereas agents of God seek to enlighten humanity and provide access to divine truth. In column 13 the writer graphically depicts the intensity of his struggle with his rivals. He describes his opponents’ lying words as a snake’s venom (13.29), causing incurable pain (13.30) and bringing his strength to an end (13.30–31). Believing that he has been overtaken (13.29), the writer depicts himself as tied with ropes that cannot be untied (13.38–39) and chained with chains that cannot be broken (13.39–41). In 13.41 the author attributes all of this to Belial. Such vivid imagery underscores the fierce contest taking place between the

175

‫ותשימני נס לבחירי צדק ומליץ דעת ברזי פלא‬ As discussed when we examined 9.28b–29, the foundation (‫ )סוד‬of humans was sin and shame. Here the Teacher has been appointed by God as a foundation of truth. This is a significant distinction, which may serve to demonstrate the status of the Teacher versus other human beings. 177 Such a dichotomy between the groups recalls Paul’s own statement about how the fragrance of the knowledge of God becomes to some a fragrance of life but to others a fragrance of death (2 Cor 2:15–16). 178 For example, 10.27–28; 15.10. 176

2.8 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document

109

agents of God and Belial and portrays the effects of this contest upon the Teacher. Nonetheless, in the midst of the contest between God and Belial, the writer stresses divine agency in his life. In column 10 it is God who sets him up as a reproach, an object of derision, a foundation of truth and knowledge, a sign for the chosen, and a conveyor of knowledge. This motif of divine agency recurs in column 12. The Teacher becomes the conduit through which God makes divine wonders known. Once again he presents himself in stark contrast with those who belong to Belial. In 12.28b–34a he writes: ‫ובי האירותה פני רבים ותגבר עד לאין מספר כי הודעתני ברזי‬ ‫פלאכה ובסוד פלאכה הגברתה עמדי והפלא לנגד רבים בעבור כבודכה ולהודיע‬ ‫לכול החיים גבורותיכה מי בשר כזאת ומה יצר חמר להגדיל פלאות והוא בעוון‬ ‫מרחם ועד שבה באשמת מעל ואני ידעתי כי לוא לאנוש צדקה ולוא לבן אדם תום‬ ‫דרך לאל עליון כול מעשי צדקה ודרך אנוש לוא תכון כי אם ברוח יצר אל לו‬ ‫להתם דרך לבני אדם למען ידעו כול מעשיו בכוח גבורתו ורוב רחמיו על כול בני‬ ‫רצונו‬ (28) And by me you have enlightened the face(s) of many and you have increased them until they are innumerable, for you have made known to me your wonderful (29) mysteries and with your wonderful counsel you have shown yourself strong to me and you worked wonders before many for your glory and to make known (30) to all living things your great works. What flesh is like this? What creature of clay can do wonders? He is in iniquity (31) from the womb until old age in guilt of unfaithfulness. And I know that righteousness is not for a man and for a son of Adam there is not a perfect (32) path. To God Most High belongs every work of righteousness and the path of a man will not be established except by the spirit God fashioned for him (33) to perfect the way for the sons of Adam so that they know all his deeds in his great strength and the multitude of his compassion upon all sons of (34a) his favor.179

The Teacher reiterates a link between knowledge, the suprahuman world, and the human world by acknowledging that God has brought insight to many people through him. God works wonders through him, a recipient of mysteries, providing proof to his audience and to his enemies that he is God’s chosen vessel of revelation. Yet God’s wonders cause the Teacher to perceive the insignificance of flesh in comparison to these awesome acts and mysteries. The writer observes that the “son of Adam” is flesh and lives in iniquity throughout his entire life span, a view of the flesh that appears also in the Community Hymns (5.32, 9.24). The hope of this flesh-being lies with God, who can form or fashion a spirit for the son of Adam. Here again, God through a spirit comes to the aid of the human, similar to what is articulated in 5.35b, 6.36, and in the Aramaic Levi Document. The spirit that God makes for the human being overcomes the situation depicted in 12.31 in which there is no perfect path for a person. God’s ability to form a spirit for the human illustrates divine power to 179 Also, in 20.14–15, the writer attributes the reception of knowledge to God’s holy spirit placed within him.

110

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

overcome an obstacle humanity cannot overcome itself. It also demonstrates the interconnectedness of the spirit world and the human world. God reveals divine power on behalf of humanity and divine compassion for humanity by fashioning a spirit for the son of Adam. This action makes a perfect path possible for him. The portrayal of this act as compassionate illustrates God’s unwillingness to leave humanity in a state of iniquity (12.30). In addition, to designate this act as one of power simultaneously calls attention to the power struggle taking place around knowledge and affirms that God’s authority trumps flesh and iniquity.180 Although the author highlights both God’s power and God’s compassion, he emphasizes that these attributes of God’s nature only occur for the “sons of favor.” In the Teacher Hymns, the writer sets up stark dichotomies between those on the Teacher’s side and those who oppose the Teacher. The author believes that God reserves divine power and compassion for the sons of favor who listen to the Teacher, thereby signifying their alignment with God. In the eyes of the Teacher, two types of people exist – those who experience God’s power and compassion, and those who do not. This glaring dualism occurs in other places as well. Above in 10.11c–10.12, the Teacher is a counsel of truth for those on a straight path, and in 10.15 he is a sign for the chosen of righteousness. His revelatory function has a restrictive purpose – it occurs only to those deemed favored or chosen by God.181 In 11.21c–24 the writer provides a glimpse into the hope and eschatological purpose of the human. He declares: ‫ואדעה כיא יש מקוה לאשר יצרתה מעפר לסוד עולם ורוח נעוה טהרתה מפשע רב‬ ‫להתיצב במעמד עם צבא קדושים ולבוא ביחד עם עדת בני שמים ותפל לאיש גורל‬ ‫עולם עם רוחות דעת להלל שמכה ביחד רנה ולספר נפלאותיכה לנגד כול מעשיכה‬ And I know that there is hope for someone you fashioned out of clay for an eternal assembly. And a spirit of corruption you cleansed from great rebellion so that he can stand firm in service with the army of the holy ones and enter in community with the congregation of the sons of heaven. And you cast for man a lot forever with the spirits of knowledge to praise your name in the community of joy and to recount your wonders before all your works.

Several motifs worthy of note appear here. First, a human being, although made of clay and dust, can attain status in an everlasting community. This belief extends the idea present in 9.23. Just as God overcomes flesh and opposing spirits to grant knowledge to the hymnist in the present, God’s power also has eternal ramifications for the human being. God’s present work on behalf of humanity anticipates God’s divine eternal purpose for humanity. Second, for a human

180 In 12.24, the author speaks of God displaying God’s power through him, another indication of the Teacher’s status. 181 The restrictive nature of the Teacher’s mission is comparable to the maskil’s instruction in 1QS 3.13 which is only for the “sons of light.”

2.8 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document

111

being to transition to this status, God cleanses (‫ )טהר‬her from a spirit of corruption, and this cleansing makes it possible for her to join the holy army and the sons of heaven. 182 The spirit from which a person is cleansed is the same spirit (‫ )נעויה‬that rules the human in 5.32–33 and with which the human comes to be identified in 9.24. This spirit of distortion ֹor corruption plays a significant role in the view of the writer of the Community Hymns and in the view of the Teacher. From the Teacher’s perspective, once the removal of this spirit takes place, entrance into a new realm becomes possible. Third, a person transitions from being a son of Adam, whose existence revolves around fleshliness and subjection to a spirit of distortion, to being in communion with sons of heaven. More than likely, this phrase refers to angels of God. 183 If this is the case, then the person experiences a radical transformative move in that she, no longer bound by fleshly existence, undergoes elevation to an existence in which communion with heavenly beings becomes a reality. It is important to note that the human will commune with the holy ones, sons of heaven, and the spirits of knowledge. This statement testifies to the existence of spirits of knowledge and to a destiny that was not possible before due to the human’s fleshly composition and possession of a spirit of distortion. This spirit of distortion prevented access to this divine state. The writer claims that although knowledge may be mediated in the present, even through him as a divine instrument, this mediated knowledge only foreshadows what will take place eternally – an everlasting communion with spirits of knowledge. Thus, the writer offers a depiction of the world in which access to knowledge is mediated by God to humans in the present, with a view to the future where human beings commune with spirits of knowledge eternally. Hence, in the Teacher Hymns one has a portrait of the Teacher as a mediator of divine knowledge and a portrayal of humanity’s eternal communion with spirits of knowledge as an eschatological reward. This emphasis on knowledge in the present and in the future suggests the crucial nature of knowledge for the Teacher and his audience. Knowledge of God is bound up with every facet of life: the human, the suprahuman, the individual, the communal, the present, and the future. Moreover, God’s action leads to praise (11.24). The human being’s lot with the spirits of knowledge enables her to praise God’s name in the community of joy, the community of the sons of heaven (11.23). She enters into and becomes part of the eternal doxological praise proclaiming God’s wonders in the midst of all God’s handiwork.

182

A comparable shift occurs in 1QS 4.21–22. There God through a holy spirit purifies a person from a spirit of impurity. Once this purification takes place, the person can receive knowledge of the Most High, wisdom from the sons of heaven, and understanding. Like 1QHa, there is a realm of knowledge accessible only after cleansing or purification. 183 The idea that the angels comprise the “sons of heaven” seems likely since this provides a fitting contrast to the sons of Adam, clay vs. spirit, earthly vs. heavenly.

112

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

2.8.5 Paul and the Teacher Hymns Like the Teacher in the Teacher Hymns, Paul presents himself as an agent of revelation in various places throughout 2 Corinthians. One finds this theme by tracing his use of the verb φανερόω whenever he speaks about the gospel. For example, in 2 Corinthians 2:14 Paul praises God for leading him in a triumphal procession in Christ. He then goes on to state that the “fragrance of [God’s] knowledge is revealed (φανεροῦντι) through us in every place,” suggesting that through him, an apostle, God makes knowledge about the divine evident.184 Significantly, the language of divine knowledge and Paul’s presentation of himself as a medium of that knowledge in 2 Corinthians 2:14 occur in a military context, specifically a Roman military triumphal procession.185 In the triumphus, generals and soldiers parade their spoils of war, including prisoners and any wealth gathered.186 Paul’s description of himself being led by God in the triumphal procession evokes an image of a victorious general or soldier whom God displays before all. The language in 2 Corinthians 10:3–6 with his certainty of military success corresponds with such an interpretation. At the 184

In keeping with the “fragrant” metaphor Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, translates φανερόω as diffuse (246). Sometimes incense was burned during Roman processions (Horace, Odes 4.2.50–51; Suetonius, Nero 25.2), and this could be the background of Paul’s use of ὀσµή here (Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 246). 185 There is some discussion regarding the use of θριαµβεύειν in 2:14. According to Rory B. Egan (“Lexical Evidence on Two Pauline Passages,” NovT 19 [1977]: 34–62), no lexical evidence exists for its metaphorical use before Paul. Thus, he questions whether the Corinthians would have perceived it as such (38). For him the correct connotation would be “display,” “manifest,” or “make known” (40, 50). Peter Marshall (“A Metaphor of Social Shame: ΘΡΙΑΜΒΕΥΕΙΝ in 2 Cor. 2:14,” NovT 25 [1983]: 302–317), although agreeing with Egan’s conclusion regarding the lack of lexical evidence, argues that even though there is no extant Greek evidence, there is support for a Latin metaphor which may indicate that a Greek counterpart once existed (304–306, 311–313). In addition, he asserts that the mere fact Paul uses θριαµβεύειν metaphorically indicates that it was a known metaphor. At the same time, he leaves open the possibility that the language is Paul’s own unique contribution (309). For Marshall, Paul uses the metaphor to depict himself as a “figure of shame” who is “led captive in triumph” (302). 186 Plutarch, Pomp. 45; Marc. 21; Cassius Dio, Historia Romana 6.23; Josephus, BJ 7.136, 150–153. Scholars who believe the Roman triumph is the background of Paul’s language include Brink, “A General’s Exhortation to His Troops,” 85–87; Barrett, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 97–98; Harris, “2 Corinthians,” 331–332; Matera, II Corinthians, 72– 74; Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:195. However, Paul Duff (“Metaphor, Motif, and Meaning: The Rhetorical Strategy Behind the Image ‘Led in Triumph’ in 2 Cor 2:14,” CBQ 53 [1991]: 79–92) contends that the Greco-Roman epiphany processions that announce the deity’s advent form the background of the apostle’s language. He writes, “An epiphany procession of a deity could be metaphorically portrayed as a triumphal procession. This metaphorical usage – an epiphany procession metaphorically depicted as a triumphal parade – probably came about because many deities in the ancient world were considered victors” (83).

2.8 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document

113

same time, the apostle may also refer to himself as a slave conquered by God and paraded about in the divine procession.187 The possibility that Paul is intentionally ambiguous here cannot be totally disregarded. That he wants to depict himself as both slave and conquering general corresponds to the paradoxical existence he espouses throughout 2 Corinthians. He lives in the flesh but does not wage war according to the flesh. He is unknown, and yet known, dying, and yet alive, sorrowful, but still rejoicing, having nothing, but possessing everything (cf. 6:9–10). He is both conquered slave and victorious general, both weak and powerful. As an apostle, he lives a life characterized by contrasting realities. Within this oxymoronic presentation of his life, Paul depicts God as the one responsible for the procession and the one who spreads divine knowledge through him.188 Like the Teacher in the Teacher Hymns, the apostle becomes part of God’s revelatory process. In 2 Corinthians 2:15 Paul’s role in the revelatory process appears again in a pronounced way. He writes that he is a fragrance of Christ to God to those being saved and to those perishing. In this verse Paul moves from depicting himself as an apostle through whom the fragrance is revealed or spread (2:14) to actually becoming the aroma of Christ to God. 189 Such language suggests 187

This is the view of Fitzgerald (Cracks in an Earthen Vessel) who writes, “Paul is depicting himself … as a conquered captive who walks before the chariot of the divine Triumphator” (161), and of Lamar Williamson (“Led in Triumph: Paul’s Use of Thriambeuō,” Int 22 [1968]: 317–332). Williamson takes this perspective based upon the wider usage of the term. Both Harris and Barnett also agree with the depiction of Paul as slave, whereas Barrett views Paul as a soldier-general. James Scott (“Throne-Chariot Mysticism in Qumran and in Paul” in Eschatology, Messianism, and the Dead Sea Scrolls, eds. Craig Evans and Peter Flint, Studies in the DSS and Related Literature [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997]) argues that Paul’s use of the Roman triumphal procession motif indicates the apostle’s connection with Merkabah mysticism. The imagery reveals “God on his throne-chariot lead[ing] the apostle captive” (112). 188 Interestingly, processions often occurred after wars were completed. For example, Plutarch, Marc. 22; Livy 7.26–27. Paul, on the contrary, describes his triumph as taking place in the midst of battle. His use of triumphus imagery in correspondence in which he repeatedly refers to opposing and conflicting forces indicates that a war continues (2:11; 4:4–12; cf. 10:3–6). Paul’s language suggests a proleptic description of God’s certain victory. That God can now lead his apostles in a victorious divine procession even before the war concludes demonstrates the apostle’s assurance of the outcome. The paradox Paul points to here of victory already though not yet fully realized appears also in 1 Cor 15:25 in which Christ reigns ἄχρι until he has placed all enemies under his feet. Christ’s reign is already a fact even though all enemies have not been subdued. Likewise, Paul and the apostles are led in triumph, although the battle has not concluded. In both cases, victory is described proleptically and as a current state of reality. I am indebted to J. Ross Wagner for alerting me to this earlier victory paradox in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians. 189 With the change in terminology from ὀσµή to εὐωδία and with the change in referent (Paul becomes the fragrance), Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, believes that Paul moves from a depiction of the Roman triumph to OT sacrifice (248). So also, Matera, II

114

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

that Paul connects his life to the gospel in such a way that he not only proclaims the gospel but he in his own person becomes the gospel incarnate. The messenger is inseparable from the message. 190 Paul highlights this inseparability in 2 Corinthians 2:17. He declares that he is not like many others who peddle the λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ. Unlike them, he speaks sincerely as one from God and before God exhibiting the gospel he proclaims in his behavior and his speech. His use of the phrase λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ in 2 Corinthians 2:17 implies that the fragrance of God’s knowledge that is revealed through him is the gospel (2 Cor 2:14). This also seems likely in light of the fact that in 2 Corinthians 2:15 Paul states that this fragrance creates two groups: οἱ σῳζοµένοι and οἱ ἀπολλυµένοι. To one group he is a fragrance of life and to the other group he is a fragrance of death. The λόγος τοῦ σταυροῦ creates these same two categories of people in 1 Corinthians 1:18. Thus, the fragrance of God’s knowledge that is revealed through him is the fragrance of the gospel. The λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ and the λόγος τοῦ σταυροῦ (2 Cor 2:17; 1 Cor 1:18) that he proclaims contains a sweet smell of salvation to some, but to others it reeks of the stench of death.191 The following quote from Harris sums up this view well. He writes concerning the apostles as aroma and as carriers of the gospel:

Corinthians, who writes, “Paul employs both metaphors (the triumphal procession and the fragrant aroma of sacrificial offering) to clarify the paradoxical nature of his ministry. Although he appears as a defeated and humiliated prisoner to the world, he is in fact exuding the sweet-smelling fragrance of Christ’s sacrificial death by the gospel (the knowledge of God) he preaches and the ministry he exercises” (73–74). 190 This view of the interconnection between message and messenger can also be seen in Paul’s letter to the Galatians. The marks in 6:17 (τὰ στίγµατα) from persecution that Paul bore upon his body for the sake of the gospel were marks that put Christ on public display, painting a picture of Christ’s death. The use of the term προγράφω in 3:1, which carries the connotation of billboard and placard, suggests that just as significant as his preaching was Paul’s presentation of his body as the canvas upon which Christ’s death was being re-enacted. Paul used his body to present the cross to the Galatians during his proclamation to them. Consequently, he can characterize this display of his body as “οἷς κατ’ ὀφθαλµους Ἰησοῦς Χριστὸς προεγράφη ἐσταυρωµένος” (lit. to whom before your eyes Jesus Christ was publicly displayed as crucified). Here I follow the perspective of Basil Davis, “The Meaning of PROEGRAPHE in Galatians 3:1,” NTS 45 (1999): 194–212 and Susan Eastman, Recovering Paul’s Mother Tongue: Language and Theology in Galatians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), specifically the discussion on 97–105. Cf. Richard B. Hays, The Letter to the Galatians, NIB (Nashville: Abingdon, 2000), 250. Like the Hebrew prophets, whose bodies embodied their prophetic message, Paul’s body reveals the gospel. The gospel Paul preaches and τὰ στίγµατα he displays become evidence of his crucifixion with Christ, as well as evidence that the same dialectic of weakness and power that characterized Christ characterizes his life also. 191 Yet as stated above, these two groups are not static for Paul as he asserts in 10:5 by his statement that through his divine weapons he is engaged in capturing every mind, even those currently deemed τοὺς ἀπολλυµένους.

2.8 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document

115

As God’s agents for the widespread diffusion of the gospel (2:14), as proclaimers of God’s word (2:17), the apostles became the aroma of Christ that was sensed by God. To the extent that they diffused the fragrance of Christ by life and word, they were the fragrance of Christ…. Whereas in v. 14 it is the gospel that is the sweet fragrance, in v. 15 it is the apostles as they embody and proclaim that gospel.192

The fusion between apostle and gospel that Harris observes appears again in 2 Corinthians 4. In 2 Corinthians 4:5 Paul reaffirms that the gospel spreads through him orally: “We do not preach ourselves, but Jesus Christ the Lord.” Yet he also declares that his body becomes the place through which the gospel proclamation takes place. To indicate this reality, the apostle uses the same verb φανερόω to connect the action of the gospel’s spread (2:14) to the manifestation of Jesus’s life in his body (4:10–11). He writes in 4:10 that he always carries the dying of Jesus in his body so that the life of Jesus may be made known (φανερωθῃ) in his body. He continues this thought in 4:11, declaring that he is always being handed over to death for the sake of Christ so that Jesus’s life may be revealed (φανερωθῃ) in his mortal flesh. In 4:8–9, he provides a brief list of the afflictions that he endures, for he writes that he is afflicted, perplexed, persecuted, and struck down. But in each case, God’s power comes forth, preventing him from being crushed, from being in despair, from being abandoned, and from being destroyed (ἀπόλλυµι).193 For Paul, these experiences of suffering reflect Jesus’s death, so he characterizes them as “the dying of Jesus” that he carries in his body. These suffering encounters exhibit what it means to “always be handed over to death” (4:11), for the constant nature of these afflictions is so dangerous and intense that he repeatedly approaches death through these experiences. Even as Jesus’s life was one of suffering, so too are the lives of his apostles, and as Jesus’s death brought life to the world, Paul’s sufferings bring life to the Corinthians. Through the apostle’s sufferings they see the sufferings of Christ, and through his preservation they witness God’s power manifested. Paul suffers because he preaches the gospel, and paradoxically the gospel spreads through his sufferings. Hence, he can write in 4:12, “Death is at work in us but life in you.” The knowledge of God spreads through Paul in both his afflictions, which reflect Jesus’s own suffering life, and in God’s preservation power, which exhibits God’s ultimate vindication of Jesus, the resurrection (4:14). The context of his use of the verb φανερόω in these verses in chapters 2 and 4 points to the gospel and its manifestation in the apostle’s life. Before 4:10– 11, Paul states in 4:4 that the god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, which keeps them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of 192

Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 248–249. Paul asserts that he is not among those who are being destroyed (4:3) to whom the gospel has been hidden by the god of this age. Paul recapitulates this list of sufferings but in a more detailed way in 11:23–33. 193

116

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

Christ. He then goes on to describe what he proclaims: “Jesus Christ as Lord” (4:5). Next, Paul connects his oral proclamation to the proclamation of God at creation, when God calls light to come forth out of darkness (2 Cor 4:6). Paul argues that the same God who speaks light out of darkness has also shone in his heart the light of the knowledge of the glory of God. He then proceeds to describe how this gospel is proclaimed in his very body in verses 2 Corinthians 4:7–12. Susan Eastman sums up well the discussion thus far. She writes, “[Paul] interprets his own afflictions as representing and making known the death of Jesus. His physical experiences, shared with his fellow missionaries, are a mode of knowledge – for himself, as knowledge of Jesus, and for others, as a visible sign of Jesus.”194 Indeed, as Eastman notes, Paul considers himself and his afflictions as a medium of knowing the Lord (cf. Phil. 3:10) and proclaiming the gospel. Through the sufferings in his body, the gospel is manifested and revealed in every place (2 Cor 2:14). Correspondingly, knowledge of God spreads through Paul’s oral proclamation and his bodily sufferings. For Paul and the apostles their preaching and suffering reveal God to the world. To be sure, Paul’s intermediary role derives from God’s own initiative since God shone divine knowledge into his heart (4:6). As Paul repeatedly insists, his intermediary status does not result from a human endeavor or from human power but originates with God, and therefore, his position signifies the interplay of divine and human agency. It is God that leads Paul in the triumphal procession and spreads knowledge through him in every place. It is also God who makes him the aroma to those being saved and to those perishing. In addition, God preserves him in the midst of all that he suffers. Paul participates and cooperates with God’s mission of revealing the gospel to the world (2 Cor 2:14–17; 4:5–15) and proclaims that God makes a divine appeal through him (5:20). He also writes in 6:1 that he works together with God, which again denotes a convergence of human and divine agency. Paul’s language, then, demonstrates a recurring motif of divine and human agency at work in the spread of the gospel. The apostle expresses this divine/human partnership in the proclamation process with his use of Genesis 1:3 in 2 Corinthians 4:6 and Psalm 116:10 in 2 Corinthians 4:13. Just as God spoke light to dispel darkness, so, too, Paul as his servant can speak in the midst of blindness (darkness) through the spirit of faith (4:13). Paul becomes a participant in God’s speech act of dispelling darkness, and God’s action provides the impetus for Paul to speak to those experiencing blindness. Through his use of Genesis 1:3 and Psalm 116:10, the apostle demonstrates that his proclamation participates in God’s own declaratory act, 194 Susan Eastman, “Ashes on the Frontal Lobe: Cognitive Dissonance and Cruciform Cognition in 2 Corinthians,” in The Unrelenting God: Essays on God’s Action in Scripture in Honor of Beverly Roberts Gaventa, eds. David J. Downs and Matthew L. Skinner (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2013), 204.

2.8 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document

117

thereby intimating his belief that unbelievers are not destined to remain blind (4:4). Here, Paul anticipates his later statement in 10:5 that with his divine weapons he captures every mind, for his bold speech echoes the speech of the psalmist who also dared to speak faithfully in uncertain circumstances.195 These instances, which appear earlier in the letter, prepare the way for Paul’s continued depiction of himself as an agent of knowledge in 2 Corinthians 10– 13. The pivotal verse for this depiction occurs in 2 Corinthians 11:6 in which Paul boldly declares, “I may be untrained in speech, but not in knowledge.”196 Paul asserts his epistemological expertise and states unequivocally that this expertise should be well-known to his audience because it was revealed (φανερώσαντες) to them in every way. 197 He employs the same term φανερόω, which he used earlier in chapters 2 and 4 to speak of the gospel being made known through him. 198 Paul’s training in the gospel as exemplified by his proclamation, his suffering life, and even the supernatural displays of power (12:12) 195

In 2 Cor 3:3 Paul uses the verb φανερόω to describe how the Corinthians are being revealed as a letter of Christ. Paul’s intermediary role facilitates the intermediary role of others. The Corinthians in turn can now be read by all people, providing access to knowledge of God: God’s saving power through the Christ event. Paul explicitly relates their revelatory role to the Spirit for they have been written “not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God” (2 Cor 3:3). 196 Martin, 2 Corinthians, rightly observes that by knowledge Paul means knowledge of God and the gospel (343). 197 Plummer, Commentary on the Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, writes of this verse: “The Apostle admits that he is not a trained rhetorician, not a professional orator, and he perhaps implies that some of his opponents have this advantage…. He might be a poor speaker, but he knew what he was talking about. He did not profess to teach them things of which he himself was ignorant. As regards the mysteries of revelation, the essential truths of the Gospel, and their relation to human life here and hereafter, he was no self-made smatterer, but an expert and a specialist, trained and inspired by the Lord Himself” (299–300). Ernst Käsemann, (Die Legitimität des Apostels: Eine Untersuchung zu 2 Korinther 10–13 [Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1956]), believes that when Paul says he is untrained in speech he lacks ecstatic free speech and is not πνευµατίκος (9). Hans Dieter Betz, (Der Apostel Paulus und die Sokratische Tradition: Eine exegetische Untersuchung zu seiner “Apologie” 2 Korinther 10–13, BHT 45 [Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1972]), on the other hand, argues that Paul stands in the Socratic tradition in which a distinction exists between the sophists and the philosophers. Just as Socrates was an ἰδιώτης, so, too, is Paul. Both Socrates, and Paul present a contrast to sophistic rhetorical skill (59). 198 Paul also uses φανερόω in 5:10, 11 and in 7:12. In 5:10, he uses the term to speak of everyone’s works being revealed before the judgment seat of Christ. In 5:11 the word has the connotation of being well-known to God and to the Corinthians. Or, as Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, puts it, to “be in a revealed state” (414). Paul’s statement in 5:11b that he hopes he and the apostles are well-known to the Corinthians is similar to his statement in 11:6 where he adamantly insists that what he is is no secret to the Corinthians: He is no fraud. The apostle writes in 7:12 that he wrote to the Corinthians so that their zeal for him would be revealed or made known to them before God. Thus, φανερόω also has the sense of reveal but it refers to the exposure of the Corinthians’ devotion to Paul. And finally, the

118

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

demonstrates Paul’s status as God’s revelatory agent. Indeed, his bold declaration in 11:6 looks backward and forward. Since Paul is trained in knowledge, he can identify reasonings and arguments opposed to the knowledge of God (10:4c–5), distinguish false from true apostles (11:13), and servants of God from servants of Satan (11:14–15). In sum, Paul has the ability to understand and perceive what is really taking place in Corinth. He has been entrusted with the gospel of God (11:7), and this gospel equips him: 1) to distinguish the forces operating behind his opponents, 2) to engage in battle for the minds of the Corinthians (10:5; 11:3) and unbelievers (10:5; 4:4), and 3) to discern the Corinthians’ dangerous adherence to another Jesus, a different spirit, and a different gospel (11:4). Paul reminds his audience in 11:7 that he proclaimed God’s gospel to them, and he emphasizes the contrast between the gospel he proclaimed and the different gospel heralded by his opponents. He, unlike his rivals, has been trained in knowledge. In these passages, the links between cosmology, epistemology, and anthropology are underscored. Evil forces lead minds astray (11:3, 13–14), but Paul through divine assistance works to capture those very minds (10:5), partnering with God in his role as agent of knowledge and revelation. The opposition to knowledge of God which Paul refers to in 2 Corinthians 10:5 finds its correlate in 2 Corinthians 4:3–4, 8–9, and the correlate of Paul’s mission in 2 Corinthians 10:3– 6 occurs in 2 Corinthians 4:5–6. Paul’s own divine rescue precipitates his mission of participating in God’s rescue of humanity (cf. Gal1:4). The obstruction to the gospel by the god of this age that Paul highlights in 4:4 continues in 4:8–9 and 11:23–28, and although Paul has received the “knowledge of the glory of God” (4:6), characterizing himself as one trained in γνῶσις (11:6; cf. 6:7), this reception does not stop opposition, as his own life experiences attest. The god of this age continues to afflict Paul by creating endless sufferings for God’s apostle. Nevertheless, Paul characterizes these sufferings as the dying of Jesus. Although the battle of opposing forces rages on, the victory is certain. Since the cross is God’s power for Paul (1 Cor 1:18), the afflictions and their source, despite their adversarial nature, cannot overcome the cross. Rather, the cross overcomes them. Afflictions, then, are part of the struggles between God and Satan, and the cross event exemplifies the height of this conflict and the height of its resolution (1 Cor 1:23–24, 27–28; 2:5). The dying of Jesus on the cross dealt a decisive blow to the opposition, but Paul takes part in a struggle in which the enemy refuses to admit defeat, and so Satan continues to blind (2 Cor 4:4), to afflict

apostle uses the noun form, ἡ φανέρωσις, in 4:2. He contrasts the hidden things of shame with his practice of the full disclosure of truth. He does not walk in or live a life of deceit, and he does not distort the word of God.

2.8 1QHa and the Aramaic Levi Document

119

(2 Cor 4:8–9), to oppose (2 Cor 10:5), and to deceive (2 Cor 11:3–4).199 When Paul juxtaposes the activity of the god of this age who blinds with the activity of the God who shines into the hearts of humans (2 Cor 4:4–11), he highlights a strong dichotomy to his audience between the activity of Satan and the activity of God. Paul’s mission entails fighting against this oppositional strategy with his divine weapons, reminding the enemy with every mind he captures that God’s victory reigns. Paul acknowledges that the adversities he faces cannot be overcome or endured through his own human ability but only through God’s power (4:7) that refuses to allow him to be overcome and destroyed. The apostle is confident that the God who raised Jesus will also raise him (4:14), so even if his outer body wastes away due to his intense suffering this wasting away is not final (4:16–18; cf. 1 Cor 15:42–58). The gospel is a light that permeates darkness, even though it faces resistance. Charles K. Barrett’s comments regarding Paul’s apostolic task are worth quoting at length: Paul sees his ministry as the means of bringing light to the world; that which illuminates the world, in the spiritual sense, is knowledge; knowledge is knowledge of the glory (not simply the majesty but the saving acts) of God; and this is to be seen in the face, that is, in the person … of Christ. As the image of God he is the place where God himself, the invisible, is known.… As at the creation light broke out from the darkness and illuminated the world, so through Paul’s apostolic ministry the knowledge of God is diffused in glory.200

Barrett’s quote brings together the aforementioned themes of this section: the intersection of divine knowledge and proclamation and Paul as the proclaimer and embodiment of the gospel. Like the Teacher in the Teacher Hymns, Paul depicts himself as appointed by God for the purpose of divine proclamation.201 God establishes Paul to declare through word, action, and suffering God’s “saving acts” in Christ. Alexandra Brown captures well the role of Paul’s suffering body in the gospel’s proclamation. She states, “[Paul’s] battle-afflicted body, like a copy of the crucifixion, manifests divine power to save (11:23– 199

J. Louis Martyn’s observations (“From Paul to Flannery O’Connor with the Power of Grace,” in Theological Issues in the Letters of Paul [Nashville: Abingdon, 1997]) in this regard are worth quoting at length, “Against the background of apocalyptic war, Paul sees that Jesus’ death is death on the battlefield, and that means that it is from Jesus’ death that one begins to perceive the contours of the real battlefield.… In the crucifixion God meets on the battlefield not the Jews, not the Sanhedrin, not even the Gentile Romans, but rather Satan and his hosts, who act in and through and on human beings…” (285–6; emphasis his). 200 Barrett, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 135 (emphasis his). 201 Analogous to the role of the Teacher in the Teacher Hymns is the function of the Maskil/Teacher in 1QS 3.13–4.26, whose task consists of teaching and giving instruction to the sons of light. He too serves a revelatory purpose by granting them knowledge about the spirit world and the nature of man. Whether or not the Teacher in the Teacher Hymns and the Maskil/Teacher in 1QS refer to the same person and/or the infamous Teacher of Righteousness is difficult to ascertain.

120

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

33).”202 Paul’s life, including his sufferings, reveals (φανερόω) the power of God and the knowledge of God to the world.

2.9 Summary and Concluding Thoughts 2.9 Summary

This chapter discussed a variety of epistemological terms employed by the apostle in chapters 10–13: λογίζοµαι, λογισµός, γνῶσις, νόηµα, συνιᾶσιν, οἶδα, γινώσκω, φρονέω. It also included instances of the apostle’s previous use of νόηµα and γνῶσις in the letter. His use of these terms throughout these chapters signifies the importance of epistemology to his argument and to his depiction of the cosmic contest around knowledge of God. The extensive military language with which he begins chapter 10 and his continued use of this language throughout the last four chapters of this letter indicates that cosmic warfare remains an underlying framework for his discussion. Into this framework he weaves epistemological concerns suggesting that a link exists between cosmology and epistemology. The apostle’s forceful language in this section of the correspondence focuses upon a strategy of satanic forces to affect the minds of human beings by blinding them to the gospel (4:4) and leading astray minds that once embraced the gospel (11:3). Paul’s task includes engaging in a divine battle for the νοήµατα of believers and unbelievers by capturing their minds with the gospel of Christ (10:5). Such a mission implies that Paul’s concern ranges beyond a mere defense of his apostolic identity. He highlights the cosmic implications of what is happening in the Corinthian situation, primarily satanic influence upon their knowledge of God. An important part of his military duty involves proclaiming the gospel of God to all and, in doing so, he captures the minds of those blinded by the god of this age and those who like the Corinthians are in danger of falling prey to deception (11:3). In his discussion regarding νόηµα, Paul explicitly identifies Eve’s encounter with the serpent as important to the situation in Corinth (11:3), which underscores the antiquity of the struggle between good and evil, between God and Satan. His reference to Genesis highlights part of his cultural encyclopedia where relationships between cosmology, knowledge, deception, and humanity abound. The apostle’s connection between epistemology and cosmology has profound implications for his theological anthropology, for such an intimate connection conveys the situation of human beings in the cosmos. Outside forces affect and shape the agency of humans since these outside forces influence their minds. Consequently, Paul’s cosmic view leads to an important intersection of his epistemology and theological anthropology: the significance 202 Alexandra Brown, “The Gospel Takes Place: Paul’s Theology of Power-in-Weakness in 2 Corinthians,” Int 52 (1998): 274.

2.9 Summary

121

of suprahuman powers in regard to knowledge of God because these powers seek either to oppose human knowledge of God or to provide humans with the assistance needed to acquire knowledge of God. Paul’s perspective on the intermingling of cosmic forces with humans’ ability to acquire knowledge of God corresponds with other Jewish views of the period. His recognition that a struggle exists between the human and suprahuman realms fits within the theological environment of the time. As discussed above, 1QHa depicts a humanity whose composition makes it susceptible to spirits and unable to attain divine knowledge on its own. This document portrays a relationship between suprahuman forces and knowledge. Similarly, the Aramaic Levi Document, without linking this susceptibility to human composition, also depicts humanity as susceptible to spirits. The petitioner asks for protection from an unrighteous spirit and links an unrighteous spirit with an evil reasoning. The author presupposes a relationship between humans, the spirit world, and epistemology. Paul shares with the War Scroll a perspective of the world in which battles between humans and suprahuman beings exist. In addition, both the War Scroll and The Treatise of the Two Spirits connect knowledge and the divine sphere. In the War Scroll, Israel acquires understanding because they hear God’s voice and are seers of the angels. Through their relationship with God, they hear the deep things of the divine. In the Treatise, the spirit of truth/light, which wars with the spirit of unrighteousness/darkness and which God places in humans, is also a spirit of knowledge (3.25–4.8; 4.21–24). Although Paul does not articulate explicitly a negative view of humanity’s composition, he assumes a link between cosmology, epistemology, and anthropology. He believes in humanity’s inability to acquire knowledge of God on its own and this inability arises because humans are subject to blindness and deception, states that are due to the actions of outside forces. Earlier in 2 Corinthians divine assistance in bestowing understanding occurs when God speaks and gives the light of the knowledge of the glory of God (2 Cor 4:6); there is no doubt here about divine aid in accessing truth. Paul’s language corresponds to the War Scroll, 1QS, 1QHa, and the Aramaic Levi Document: God grants humanity insight, and only God can provide and allow access to it. Although Paul’s view includes the dependence of humanity upon God for knowledge, it incorporates another element whose conceptual counterpart appears in the Teacher Hymns. Like the Teacher who is the recipient of wisdom and subsequently the conveyor of knowledge in the Hymns, Paul is an agent of revelation upon whom understanding has been bestowed (4:6–15). As an apostle, he now participates in the divine process of granting human beings knowledge through proclamation – orally and physically (10:5; 11:4–6; 2:14– 17; 4:6–15). Since knowledge belongs to God’s realm, and humanity without divine assistance will never attain it, Paul envisages his mission as part of this divine program, which demonstrates his status as an intermediary. Paul’s life,

122

Chapter 2: Paul’s Cultural Encyclopedia

even his sufferings, becomes a method of disclosure, a revelation to his Corinthian audience. The Jewish texts examined in this chapter help provide an important window into Paul’s theological landscape and the thought-world of his environment. Each of these documents exhibits some type of a contest in the supernatural realm that affects human beings. Thus, we return to the definition of cosmic outlined in Chapter 1, that is, the notion of humans and suprahuman beings sharing social space.203 Paul takes part in this conceptual configuration, especially as it pertains to the conflict and struggle in the divine and human realms. Attending to these texts highlights how important this understanding of the world is to Paul and to his perception of the events in Corinth. These writings underscore the interpenetration of the human and suprahuman spheres and call attention to the inextricable link between the two. For the apostle and the authors of these documents, cosmology affects and shapes anthropology as well as epistemology. The next chapter explores how the conceptual structures regarding the spirit world, combat, and knowledge provided by these writings grant insight into Paul’s own struggle with the ἄγγελος Σατανᾶ in 2 Corinthians 12:7. As will be argued in the next chapter, Paul’s status as an intermediary who conveys knowledge comes to the fore in 2 Corinthians 12:1–10. His experience with the thorn in the flesh illustrates humanity’s place in the cosmos and simultaneously becomes a means of revelation to the Corinthians. His ascent episode provides the Corinthians with a glimpse into the larger conflict between God and Satan around the acquisition of divine insight. It also reveals God’s power and presence in the conflict with evil. For Paul, the contest between God and Satan is a real one that plays out in the human sphere, and his ascent experience exemplifies this clash. Hence, his life becomes a canvas that depicts vividly the conflict surrounding knowledge of God. In reference to his Himmelsreise and what it reveals, one can almost hear Paul echoing the words of the Teacher to God, “And you made me a sign for the chosen of righteousness and a conveyor of knowledge of your supreme mysteries” (10.15).

203

See the definition of cosmic given in 1.5.2.

Chapter 3

2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment 3.1 Introduction The analysis in the previous two chapters demonstrates that Paul participates in a cultural discourse in which issues of epistemology, cosmology, and anthropology intertwine. An important aspect of Paul’s cultural encyclopedia is the idea that suprahuman powers affect humanity’s ability to know God.1 In 2 Corinthians 4:4 the god of this age blinds human minds, and in 2 Corinthians 11:3 and 11:13–15 Satan and Satan’s emissaries deceive and lead people astray, illustrating that forces that oppose God also oppose human knowledge of God. In 2 Corinthians 10–13 Paul, as a διάκονος of God (11:23), engages in a struggle for the minds of the Corinthians (10:5) and portrays himself as God’s representative, fighting alongside God to capture the minds of both unbelievers and the Corinthian believers. Just as Satan blinds and sends emissaries who work to deceive, God enlightens and employs emissaries who reveal. As early as 2 Corinthians 2:14, Paul depicts himself as an instrument of God’s revelation (2:14–16), for his appearance in God’s triumphal procession and the divine knowledge God spreads through him presents the apostle as a partner in God’s revelatory process. 2 His role includes carrying weapons empowered to destroy reasonings and arguments and every high entity exalted against the knowledge of God. It also entails identifying and revealing the power that opposes God, even when that power disguises itself as a servant of righteousness (11:15). Paul’s training in γνῶσις equips him for such tasks (11:6). At the end of chapter 11, Paul depicts himself as a wounded warrior (11:23– 33) who recognizes that victory rests ultimately with God. His episode in Damascus (11:32–33) emphasizes opposition to God’s gospel and to him, while his rescue underscores God’s ability to overcome all opposition, for in 11:32– 33 God overcomes the plans of a human ruler who attempted to seize Paul. By relating this episode, the apostle shows that human rulers cannot withstand God’s power. The next event from his life that Paul shares with the Corinthians

1

The concept of “cultural encyclopedia” comes from Umberto Eco, The Limits of Interpretation (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990). 2 See discussion in 2.8.5.

124

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

is his ascent, where God again overcomes opposition.3 The themes of opposition, weakness, and divine power connect the Damascus escape and the ascent to the third heaven, for Paul continues to depict his life as a stage upon which the struggle between good and evil plays out. Paul compares himself to the false apostles in much of chapter 11 (11:22– 33). They claim to be servants of God (11:23), but Paul presents his résumé to demonstrate what the life of a true servant of God looks like; a true servant of God suffers for the sake of the gospel. Paul employs military and cosmic language to depict opposition, to forefront the existing conflict around knowledge, and to emphasize the dichotomy between power and weakness. His résumé of suffering provides a dynamic lead-in to the ascent, the climax of Paul’s argument in the letter. In Paul’s ascent account all of these themes converge, making this episode important to his presentation of opposition to divine understanding.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage – 2 Corinthians 12:1–10 3.2 Interpreting the Passage

As will be demonstrated in the following analysis, the themes of cosmology, epistemology, and anthropology converge in several ways in the apostle’s account of his heavenly journey. First, the introduction of ὀπτασίας and ἀποκαλύψεις in 12:1 as mediums of knowledge cohere with the epistemological emphasis seen in other places in the letter, especially in 10:4–5 and 11:3, 6.4 Second, the use of οἶδα in 12:2–3 and λογίζοµαι in 12:6 continues the theme of knowledge within an apocalyptic/cosmic framework. The human subject experiences limitations to knowledge and simultaneously becomes privy to knowledge of and from the divine realm. Third, in v. 7 Paul refers to an ἄγγελος σατανᾶ, another instance of apocalyptic/cosmic language in this letter. Suprahuman forces opposed to God appear in opposition to Paul. Fourth, military language continues in this section with the term σκόλοψ (12:7), a word with martial connotations. The apostle’s characterization of the angel as beating, knocking, or striking him also suggests intense opposition. Paul moves from a depiction of himself as one fighting alongside God in 10:3–6 to the explicit naming of his opponent and his opponent’s tactics – the deceptive actions of Satan and Satan’s servants in chapter 11 (11:13–15; cf. 11:3). He then portrays himself in the final verses of chapter 11 as an embattled apostle, weak and

3 Paula Gooder, Only the Third Heaven?: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10 and Heavenly Ascent (London: T&T Clark, 2007) also views opposition as the theme that ties these two episodes together (205–206; see also 200–201). 4 See the discussion of cognitive terms in 2.4.1–2.4.2 of this study.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

125

suffering for the sake of the gospel. The ascent further illustrates Paul’s weakness and suffering and the satanic obstruction he faces.5 The purpose of this chapter is to establish that Paul’s Entrückung continues the themes present in chapters 10 and 11. Most importantly, Paul’s encounter with the angel of Satan emphasizes his own battle with evil, a battle about which he has previously informed the Corinthians. In chapters 10 and 11 Paul recounts his own role in this struggle and attempts to make the Corinthians see that they too are part of this cosmic conflict. In chapter 11 he narrates for the Corinthians the physical hardships he has endured in the earthly realm, whereas in chapter 12 he explicitly narrates opposition in the cosmic realm – a direct encounter with an angelic being. The significance of Paul’s confrontation lies in his underscoring opposition at both levels, earthly and cosmic. Although this satanic entity attempted to hinder his revelatory encounters, to oppose his knowledge of God, the answer Paul receives from the Lord during this struggle assures him that he does not battle evil alone and that God’s power is sufficient. Looking ahead to the variety of texts that will be examined in this chapter, a word regarding methodology is in order. The methodology employed here follows the proposal of Geza Vermes in “Jewish Literature and New Testament Exegesis,” in which he suggests that “instead of looking at the New Testament as an independent unit set against a background of Judaism, we have to see it as part of a larger environment of Jewish religious and cultural history.” 6 As will be seen below, this section of the project shows Paul’s participation in Jewish traditions.7 As a result, a variety of texts from a range of periods including Hekhalot literature, which postdates the apostle are examined. Vermes’ articulation of the importance of such a project is worth noting. He writes that if the New Testament is “envisaged, not as standing apart from Judaism and above it, but as organically bound up with it, the stages of religious thought preceding it and following it are not merely relevant but essential to an historical understanding and evaluation of its message, including its originality and peculiarity.”8 In taking up Vermes’ challenge, this chapter surveys a variety of writings that precede Paul, that are roughly contemporaneous with him, and that postdate him. These works provide “conceptual affinities” for viewing

5 Paul Barnett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997) writes, “Like the escape from Damascus, this event served to highlight his weaknesses” (562). 6 Geza Vermes, “Jewish Literature and New Testament Exegesis: Reflections on Methodology,” JJS 33 (1982): 375. 7 The previous chapter in which sections of 1QHa, the Aramaic Levi Document, 1QS, and the War Scroll were examined followed this trajectory as well. 8 Vermes, “Jewish Literature,” 375.

126

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

Paul’s heavenly journey as an ascent that encounters opposition. 9 They demonstrate diverse depictions of opposition to divine knowledge, and they also give an indication of the socio-religious environment of the time. A broad survey enables one to see a range of portrayals and to surmise that Paul’s own account takes part in this larger conversation. This exploration “inserts” Paul’s language into a “broader canvas.”10 Inserting Paul’s language into a broader canvas for this project includes examining Greco-Roman as well as Jewish texts. As a Hellenized Jew, Paul moved in both worlds seamlessly and, as will be exhibited, the language Paul uses to describe his ascent illustrates as much. Thus, one of the goals of this chapter is to place Paul in context.11 The subsequent investigation will illustrate what Margaret Mitchell calls “the complex admixtures of Hellenism and Judaism present in Paul’s thinking.… [and] the syntheses that Paul builds upon and creates.”12 Paul utilizes Jewish apocalyptic language, language used in Hellenistic mysteries, and martial imagery to describe his ascent because the language from all of these worlds conveys his experience. The tendency of the apostle to utilize terminology from a variety of quarters is noted by Wayne Meeks, who asserts that the apostle includes “apocalyptic scenarios” even when “he is sounding most ‘Hellenistic’ or ‘rabbinic.’ He was, it seems, all these things at once.”13 This chapter explores both the complexity of Paul’s thought and the way in which his language and ideas participate in the larger discourse of his time. This chapter will also illustrate that although Paul utilizes traditions and terminology found elsewhere, he ultimately employs them in his own way and for his own aims. Consequently, while these texts shed light on his ascent, Paul’s experience is ultimately his own encounter and no mere imitation of these texts.

9 The phrase “conceptual affinities” derives from M. C. de Boer, “Paul and Apocalyptic Eschatology,” The Encyclopedia of Apocalypticism, ed. John J. Collins (New York: Continuum, 1998), 1:347. 10 Vermes, “Jewish Literature,” 375. 11 Compare Henrik Tronier, “The Corinthian Correspondence between Philosophical Idealism and Apocalypticism,” in Paul Beyond the Judaism/Hellenism Divide, ed. Troels Engberg-Pedersen (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001). He proposes an elucidation of “the comprehensive system of ideas in Paul’s construction of theology, the overall structure of meaning or inner logic that holds together the individual ideas within the argument and worldview of a given Pauline letter” (166). 12 Margaret M. Mitchell, “Pauline Accommodation and ‘Condescension’ (συγκατάβασις): 1 Cor 9:19–23 and the History of Influence,” in Paul Beyond the Judaism/Hellenism Divide, ed. Troels Engberg-Pedersen (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001), 201. 13 Wayne Meeks, “Judaism, Hellenism, and the Birth of Christianity,” in Paul Beyond the Judaism/Hellenism Divide, ed. Troels Engberg-Pedersen (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001), 27.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

127

The apostle presents his ascent episode as part of a larger picture of reality in which opposition to knowledge of God takes place, and he sketches this larger picture for the Corinthians as early as 2 Corinthians 4:4. This greater framework of obstruction explains why Paul’s ascent contains sparse details compared to other ascent texts since his focus is not necessarily upon all that he saw or heard during the journey. Rather, he focuses on the opposition he experiences and God’s response to this obstruction. In what follows, Paul’s ascent episode is depicted as part of a larger framework of opposition to knowledge of God, thus the ensuing analysis incorporates texts that present different understandings about obstacles to divine knowledge. These texts include journeys to and from heaven. The purpose of such an examination is not to suggest an amalgamation of all of these different traditions into one picture that becomes the key for understanding Paul’s experience. Instead, this investigation explores the various ways in which ascents and descents were sometimes dangerous or revelations and visions were sometimes contested by evil forces. Opposition to divine knowledge existed in this time period, and Paul takes part in such views. A survey of this material provides a point of reference for how Paul describes his own ascent and how his ascent experience could have been understood, and so this investigation illustrates the various possibilities for understanding Paul’s rapture as a dangerous one.14 It grants a “plausibility structure”15 for viewing Paul’s ascent through the lens of an encounter with the satanic by attending to some of the propensities and inclinations in descent and ascent literature with respect to the satanic realm.16 Accordingly, 14

This view differs from Johann Maier (“Das Gefährdungsmotiv bei der Himmelsreise in der Jüdischen Apokalyptik und ‘Gnosis,’” Kairos 5 [1963]: 18–40) who asserts that the event of rapture engenders danger only when the rapture is initiated by the ascender. As will be argued in the ensuing pages, Paul’s Erfahrung comes about through divine initiative and yet still depicts a perilous journey. 15 The concept of “plausibility structure” provides a helpful way to view one of the aims of this chapter and comes from Loren T. Stuckenbruck, “The Human Being and Demonic Invasion: Therapeutic Models in Ancient Jewish and Christian Texts,” in Spirituality, Theology, and Mental Health: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, ed. Christopher C. H. Cook (London: SCM, 2013). Stuckenbruck adopts this phrase from Peter Berger, The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion (New York: Doubleday, 1967). 16 In formulating these important distinctions, the following works have been quite beneficial: Scott J. Hafemann, Paul, Moses, and the History of Israel: The Letter/Spirit Contrast and the Argument from Scripture in 2 Corinthians 3, WUNT 81 (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1995), 81, 89–91; Jacob Neusner, “Anthropology and the Study of Talmudic Literature,” in Method and Meaning in Ancient Judaism, BJS 10 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1979), 21–40, especially 29–30; Loren T. Stuckenbruck, “The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament” in Qumran and the Bible: Studying the Jewish and Christian Scriptures in light of the Dead Sea Scrolls, eds. Nora Dávid and Armin Lange (Leuven: Peeters, 2010). In discussing the DSS Stuckenbruck reflects upon how they help map “a possible socio-religious terrain” (135). Such language is quite useful with other texts as well; Vermes, “Jewish Literature,” 361–376.

128

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

the following analysis provides the reader with a broader spectrum of ideas in which Paul shares. As seen in Chapters 1–2 of this project, Paul is part of a world filled with a “complex web of traditions” in which the questions of cosmology, anthropology, and epistemology converge and the spirit world both assists and hinders humanity’s knowledge of God.17 Paul’s ascent episode becomes another example of the spirit world obstructing divine insight, thereby offering an additional instance of powers that are opposed to God also opposing human knowledge of God. In this chapter, a close reading of 2 Corinthians 12:1–10 will be undertaken along with a discussion of key interpretive terms such as σκόλοψ, ὑπεραίρωµαι, and ἄγγελος σατανᾶ. An examination of the passage necessitates drawing upon five groups of texts to illumine Paul’s ascent: 1) types of ascent (soul, spirit, body) texts; 2) literature that depicts characteristics of evil beings; 3) military writings that provide background for σκόλοψ; 4) documents that portray opposition to knowledge of God in descents and ascents; and 5) texts that contain prayers of deliverance from demonic beings. With respect to category four, the subsequent analysis will contain texts that depict obstruction to divine revelation in a variety of ways. Such writings deal with danger regarding earthly descents and heavenly ascents and show the various ways opposition to descents and ascents take shape in different places in Jewish literature. The examination will illustrate the existence of documents that contain patterns of opposition in ascents to heaven and descents from heaven. Such patterns of opposition include angelic obstruction to a prayer for understanding (Daniel), attempts by an evil being to block Abraham’s ascent (Apocalypse of Abraham), anger by evil forces against visions and revelations (Ascension of Isaiah), and the encounter of the ascender, Rabbi Aqiba, with angels of destruction (Hekhalot Literature). In regard to category five, the study will examine prayers of deliverance from the demonic (Aramaic Levi Document, 11Q5, Noahic Prayer from Jubilees), which became more prominent right before and during the 1st century CE.18 This study situates Paul’s request to the Lord for the removal of his thorn within this genre of prayers of deliverance. The exegetical analysis will include a discussion of these additional texts and some of the ways interpreters have traditionally read this passage. In light of the analyses of Chapter 2 and the

17 The expression “complex web of traditions” is taken from Loren T. Stuckenbruck, “Demonic Beings and the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in Explaining Evil, vol. 1, Definitions and Development, ed. J. Harold Ellens, Psychology, Religion and Spirituality (Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, 2011), 122. 18 Loren T. Stuckenbruck, “Prayers of Deliverance from the Demonic in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Early Jewish Literature,” in The Changing Face of Judaism, Christianity, and Other Greco-Roman Religions in Antiquity, eds. Ian H. Henderson and Gerbern S. Oegema, JSHRZ 2 (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 2006), 147.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

129

present chapter of this study, an alternative reading of 12:1–10 will be presented. The chapter closes with snapshots of 2 Corinthians 13, a brief consideration of how this alternative proposal coheres with Paul’s presentation of himself to other Pauline congregations, and conclusions of the analysis. To summarize, in what follows, this chapter argues that Paul’s life exemplifies what it means to be engaged in combat. It involves exposing false apostles (11:13, 15) and false gospels (11:4), recognizing the enemy’s strategies (10:5; cf. 2:11), enduring hardship (11:23–33; 12:10; cf. 6:4–5, 7–10), and facing resistance from all quarters, from both human rivals (11:24, 26, 32) and suprahuman opponents (12:7). For Paul, fighting on God’s behalf is not a glorious task about which one boasts, but a necessary one in the face of evil. The figure below demonstrates the integration of the elements that belong to the 1) epistemological, 2) anthropological, and 3) cosmological realms in Paul’s ascent.

Cosmology ὀπτασία

Epistemology οἶδα

ἀποκάλυψις

ὀπτασία

τρίτος οὐρανός

ἀποκάλυψις λογίζομαι

ἄγγελος σατανᾶ σκόλοψ τῇ σαρκί Anthropology ἐν σώματι ἐκτὸς τοῦ σώματος ἐδόθη σκόλοψ τῇ σαρκί

Figure 3.1 Linkages in Paul’s Ascent The arrows in Figure 3.1 represent the inseparable links between the epistemological, the anthropological, and the cosmological spheres of Paul’s ascent. Each component is invariably intertwined with the others. For example, Paul receives visions and revelations, which are mediums of knowledge, but these visions and revelations also have a cosmological element since they are visions and revelations of and from the Lord. In addition, the apostle travels to the third heaven, which is another cosmological feature, yet the anthropological element is connected to the epistemological and cosmological through Paul’s inability to know whether this cosmic event takes place in or outside the body. In addition, the ascent highlights one of the themes raised in the previous discussions of The Treatise of the Two Spirits, the Aramaic Levi Document and 1QHa which

130

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

is the vulnerability of human beings to outside forces. Paul is taken up to the third heaven through divine initiative and receives a thorn in the flesh from a satanic entity. The apostle’s ascent underscores human susceptibility to cosmic forces, especially when it comes to obstruction of divine knowledge by spirits opposed to God. Moreover, in his account of the ascent, Paul continues his intermediary role as an agent of knowledge and revelation to the Corinthians. As will be argued, he invites the Corinthians to hear and see him, so that his encounter may reveal to them the reality of the struggle around divine insight within the cosmic realms. This cosmic struggle is already evident in the false apostles’ intrusion into their congregations. As Satan’s emissaries, these superapostles seek to obstruct God’s gospel just as Satan’s angel attempts to stop Paul’s ascent. 3.2.1 Textual Analysis 12:1–4 (1) Καυχᾶσθαι δεῖ, οὐ συµφέρον µέν, ἐλεύσοµαι δὲ εἰς ὀπτασίας καὶ ἀποκαλύψεις κυρίου.19 (2) οἶδα ἄνθρωπον ἐν Χριστῷ πρὸ ἐτῶν δεκατεσσάρων, εἴτε ἐν σώµατι οὐκ οἶδα, εἴτε ἐκτὸς τοῦ σώµατος οὐκ οἶδα, ὁ θεὸς οἶδεν, ἁρπαγέντα τὸν τοιοῦτον ἕως τρίτου οὐρανοῦ. (3) καὶ οἶδα τὸν τοιοῦτον ἄνθρωπον, εἴτε ἐν σώµατι εἴτε χωρὶς τοῦ σώµατος οὐκ οἶδα, ὁ θεὸς οἶδεν (4) ὅτι ἡρπάγη εἰς τὸν παράδεισον καὶ ἤκουσεν ἄρρητα ῥήµατα ἃ οὐκ ἐξὸν ἀνθρώπῳ λαλῆσαι. (1) It is necessary to boast, although it is not beneficial; but I will proceed to visions and revelations of the Lord [which are beneficial].20 (2) I know a person in Christ about fourteen years ago21, whether in the body I do not know, whether out of the body I do not know, God knows, such a person was caught up to the third heaven. (3) And I know such a person, whether in the body or whether apart from the body I do not know, God knows; (4) (I know) that such a person was caught up into Paradise and heard unspeakable words which are not permissible for a person to speak.

Paul’s language in these verses highlights divine power, divine mystery, knowledge, and modes of knowledge. First, with his use of the passive form of the verb ἁρπάζω, the apostle emphasizes divine initiative and divine power in 19 The variant εἰ in 12:1 seems to be a secondary attempt at smoothing out the text and making it cohere with 11:30. Also, the δέ more than likely does appear after ἐλεύσοµαι corresponding to the µέν. Moreover, the following important witnesses support the choices made here: P46 Β F G 33 1739. 20 Similar to Alfred Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, ICC (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1915), who translates this part of the verse as “This glorying is forced upon me. I have indeed nothing to gain by it, for myself or for the good of the Church; but I will pass on to a worthier subject, viz. visions and revelations granted to me by the Lord Jesus Christ” (336; emphasis mine). 21 James D. Tabor, Things Unutterable: Paul’s Ascent to Paradise in its Greco-Roman, Judaic, and Early Christian Contexts (Lanham: University Press of America, 1986), insightfully observes, “The reference to the date seems to indicate how very important this experience was to Paul.… When it comes to such a landmark experience he has the exact date well in mind.… In any case, the experience is vividly remembered and obviously important to Paul, even after more than a decade” (115).

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

131

bestowing visions and revelations. Second, he underscores the mystery of the divine realm in his brief and cryptic description of the experience. And third, Paul speaks of visions and revelations as means of accessing the divine sphere. In 2 Corinthians 10–11 Paul foregrounds the mind and thoughts (10:4–5) and his training in knowledge (11:6), but here he admits that even his training in knowledge has limits. The experience which he is about to narrate is one that he does not totally understand, for he does not know whether this episode took place in his body or outside it.22 The fact that he repeats this inability to discern his bodily state (v. 2–3) emphasizes the extraordinary nature of this event and accents the limitation of human knowledge. This limitation points the way to God as the source of all knowledge, for as the apostle declares, there are things that only God knows. In the beginning of chapter 12 Paul recognizes that while boasting may be necessary, it is not beneficial (12:1) since one gains nothing from engaging in this exercise. Yet it is acceptable for one to boast in one’s weakness, as he says earlier in 11:30 and as he will say later regarding himself in 12:5. Paul declares that if one is to boast, let that person boast in the Lord (10:17) because boasting in anything other than one’s weakness and in the Lord is unacceptable and of no value. This is the type of boasting that the false apostles employ. Through the use of the µέν … δέ clause of 12:1, which sets up the contrasting position, Paul asserts that there is nothing to be gained by boasting in and of itself (cf. 10:17; 11:30) but he then turns to visions and revelations of the Lord, which do have value (συµφέρω). In effect, Paul says, on the one hand boasting has no value, but on the other hand, visions and revelations do have value, and I will now move on to these experiences. Paul believes that visions and revelations have significance because they underscore what is worthy of boasting – boasting in weakness and, thereby, boasting ἐν κυρίῳ (11:30; 12:9; cf. 10:17). Using the genitive case (κυρίου) in 12:1, Paul informs his readers of the object and source of his visions and revelations. The Lord is both the giver and the content of these supernatural encounters; he has visions and revelations of and from the Lord. 23 Whereas ὀπτασία appears only here in the Pauline corpus, 22 In his monograph Paul the Convert: The Apostolate and Apostasy of Saul the Pharisee (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990), Alan F. Segal writes, “Paul himself gives the best evidence for the existence of ecstatic journeys to heaven in first-century Judaism with his report in 2 Corinthians. His inability to decide whether the voyage took place in the body or out of the body is firm evidence of a mystical ascent and shows that the voyage has not been interiorized as a journey into the self, which becomes common in Kabbalah” (58). 23 I follow Andrew Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet: Studies in the Role of the Heavenly Dimension in Paul’s Thought with Special References to His Eschatology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981), 73, Frank Matera, II Corinthians (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2003), 277, Ralph P. Martin, 2 Corinthians, WBC 40 (Waco: Word, 1985), 397, and Βernhard Heininger, Paulus als Visionär: Eine Religionsgeschichtliche Studie, HBS 9 (Freiburg: Herder, 1996), 246, who caution against too sharp a distinction between

132

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

Paul employs the term ἀποκάλυψις several times in his letters to the Corinthians. In 2 Corinthians 12 he uses the word twice, in 12:1 and in 12:7. In 1 Corinthians 1:7 the apostle speaks of the revelation of Jesus Christ at the end time, and in Romans 8:19 the word appears as a reference to the revelation of the sons of God in the eschaton. He also utilizes the term in 1 Corinthians 14 in relation to spiritual gifts to indicate that believers can speak by revelation (1 Cor 14:6) and share these revelations with one another (1 Cor 14:26). He declares in Galatians 1:12 that he received the gospel through a revelation of Jesus Christ in order to emphasize the divine origin of the gospel he proclaims. His gospel does not originate from human beings or from any of the apostles who came before him but rather from a divine encounter with the risen Lord. Moreover, his decision to go up to Jerusalem and to share his gospel was governed by revelation (Gal 2:2). For Paul, there are revelations that will occur in the future and there are also revelations that believers experience in the present that they can reveal to each other.24 His gospel derives from a divine encounter, and there are moments in his own life when he makes decisions based upon such supernatural occurrences. Since Paul has used the language of revelation before with the Corinthians, his use of it in 2 Corinthians 12:1 and 2 Corinthians 12:7 probably is not altogether surprising to them. Perhaps what is surprising is what these particular visions and revelations ultimately reveal in his account. A question often posed by scholars is whether ὀπτασία and ἀποκάλυψις are synonyms or whether they refer to different types of religious experience.25 More than likely, Paul speaks about two related experiences and does not use the terms synonymously. Writers often use the term ὀπτασία to describe divine visual communication, whereas ἀποκάλυψις may have a visionary component but need not always do so. Luke uses ὀπτασία to describe the appearance of angels and the risen Jesus (Lk 1:22; 24:23; Acts 1:3; 26:19). The word also appears in Daniel in relation to the angelophanies in that book (Dan 9:23; 10:1, 7, 8, 16). Also, in Malachi 3:2 and Sirach 43:16 the word occurs to describe a the objective and subjective genitive here, noting that Paul speaks of the Lord as giver and content of the revelations. Jan Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, SP 8 (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1999), sees the genitive as objective (200). Barnett (The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 558) and Murray J. Harris, (The Second Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text, NIGTC [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005], 832–3) believe it to be a subjective genitive. Christopher R. A. Morray-Jones, “Paradise Revisited (2 Cor 12:1–12): The Jewish Mystical Background of Paul’s Apostolate” HTR 86 [1993]: 270) cites here 1 Cor. 9:1 (“Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?”) as pointing to Paul having seen the Lord. 24 Cf. Rom 16:25. 25 Those who believe they are synonyms include Victor P. Furnish, II Corinthians, AB 32A (New York: Doubleday, 1984), 524; Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, 200 and Martin, 2 Corinthians, 397. Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, does not believe they are synonyms (831).

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

133

vision of the appearance of God. Paul probably distinguishes the two categories, and yet they do relate to each other. Harris’s remarks concerning the differences between visions and revelations and the relationship between the two are worth noting. He writes, “A vision is always seen, whereas a revelation may be seen or may be received in some other way; all visions are also revelations, but not all revelations come through visions. A vision, however, is a common way of receiving a revelation.”26 Although visions have revelatory purposes, not all revelations are visual. As Paul begins to narrate his supernatural encounter, he informs the Corinthians that this heavenly journey involves both types of experiences. In 12:1 and 12:7 Paul utulizes the plural form of ὀπτασία and ἀποκάλυψις to denote general categories which he will discuss, to refer to his own visions and revelations in this experience, and to illustrate that he has had many visions and revelations.27 As noted in 12:1, Paul reports that he has seen the Lord, and so here he immediately commences to relate, albeit briefly, a visionary experience of the Lord. In addition, as discussed above, visions often occur in the context of angelophanies, and Paul’s description of the thorn in the flesh as an angel of Satan falls into the category of an angelophany. 28 This angelophany has a revelatory element because it allows him to recognize the true identity of this thorn in the flesh. 29 Furthermore, Paul receives two additional revelations in this experience. He cannot repeat one of these revelations to the Corinthians (12:4), but he does share the other with his audience in 12:9. Moreover, Paul’s entire experience in vv. 1–4 and vv. 7–9, including the visions, can be described as an ἀποκάλυψις, which is why in 12:7 he only uses the term ἀποκάλυψις to denote all that he undergoes in this event. One of the main issues with these opening verses focused on Paul’s ascent is Paul’s use of the third person. Garland posits that Paul simply adapts a method found in other visionary experiences in Jewish literature. The writers

26

Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 831. Why Paul uses the plural ὀπτασίαι and ἀποκαλυψεις here in 12:1 is explained in several ways by commentators. Scholars such as Heininger (Paulus als Visionär, 245–246) and Harris (Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 832) argue that Paul refers to general categories. Lincoln (Paradise Now and Not Yet, 72, 76) maintains that Paul originally intended to speak of several experiences but then changed his mind. Tabor (Things Unutterable, 21, 36) states that Paul refers to his many visions and revelations. The position of this project is that Paul is referring to general categories of visions and revelations as well as his own divine encounters in the specific experience of 12:1–10. 28 Here I follow Heininger, Paulus als Visionär, 255–256. 29 Heininger writes, “und stellt 12,7b–9 sozusagen den visionären counterpart zur vorher berichteten Himmelsreise dar” (Paulus als Visionär, 256, emphasis his). For Heininger, Paul gives two personal examples in 2 Cor 12:2–4 and 12:7b–9a (in reverse order) of “visions and revelations” (12:1). So he sees 12:7b–9a as the visionary component and 12:2–4 as the revelatory aspect. 27

134

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

of these texts do not allow themselves to appear as the subject but write anonymously and/or ascribe such experiences to a revered figure of the past. They may write in the name of Daniel, Enoch, or some other seer.30 The epistolary nature of Paul’s discourse may have import at this point. Since the letter is to be read out loud to the congregation, Paul holds his audience in suspense with his movement from first person to third person and back. He has just narrated his escape from Aretas’ ethnarch and now moves to visions and revelations of the Lord: He knows someone who has experienced such things. Is the person who experienced the rescue from Aretas the same one who travelled to the third heaven? Eventually, as the audience continues to listen, they realize that Paul speaks of himself as the one who endured both the rescue and the heavenly rapture. In addition to the epistolary nature of Paul’s discourse, the apostle’s fluid movement between persons mirrors his movement from one realm to another. Fluidity exists between the realms, which allows for one to move between the two spheres. He attempts to signify this fluidity through his description of the event. His words “perform” the journey linguistically. The apostle’s movement from the first person to the third person and back again underscores the mystical nature of the rapture and the mystery surrounding it. He knows the encounter happened to him but is not sure whether the event took place in or outside the body. Such observations cohere with those of Furnish, who notes that in such episodes there exists a “sense of self-transcendence” in which a person experiences herself apart from herself. He finds this illustrated in 3 Apocalypse of Baruch 17:3, where after his visions are complete the seer says, “And having come to myself, I gave glory to God.” 31 James Dunn also discusses the ability of people to observe themselves when experiencing such spiritual states.32 As Thrall notes, this explanation makes sense in reference to the psychological reality of Paul’s account. Thus, it is highly likely that Paul utilizes the third person to underscore the extraordinary nature of the experience as well as to avoid the appearance of arrogance.33 Paul does not want the Corinthians to

30

David E. Garland, 2 Corinthians, NAC 29 (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1999), 510. Eve-Marie Becker, Letter Hermeneutics in 2 Corinthians: Studies in Literarkritik and Communication Theory, trans. Helen S. Heron (New York: T&T Clark, 2005) writes, “[Paul] speaks of himself as a protagonist in the third person singular. By so doing Paul distances himself from his experience of ecstasy and puts it on an apocalyptic plane” (133). 31 Furnish, II Corinthians, 543. 32 James D. G. Dunn, Jesus and the Spirit: A Study of the Religious and Charismatic Experience of Jesus and the First Christians as Reflected in the New Testament (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1975), 214–5. 33 Margaret E. Thrall, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, ICC 47 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000), 2:782.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

135

know that he speaks about himself at the outset because he only boasts in weaknesses. 34 Only when he begins to narrate the angel of Satan episode, an episode that displays his weakness in this event, does he shift back to the first person. As has been discussed in numerous places, ascents and cosmic journeys in which the chosen are permitted to see God occur frequently in Jewish literature. In several places in the Enochic literature, Enoch is described as taking heavenly journeys and seeing God (Book of Watchers 14:8–23; Book of Parables 39:3–4; 52:1; 71:1–5). For instance, in I Enoch 14:8–9a Enoch relates his ascent: Καὶ ἐµοὶ ἐφ’ ὁράσει οὕτως ἐδείχθη· ἰδοὺ νεφέλαι ἐν τῇ ὁράσει ἐκάλουν καὶ ὁµίχλαι µε ἐφώνουν, καὶ διαδροµαὶ τῶν ἀστέρων καὶ διαστραπαί µε κατεσπούδαζον καὶ ἐθορύβαζόν µε, καὶ ἄνεµοι ἐν τῇ ὁράσει µου ἐξεπέτασάν µε καὶ ἐπῆράν µε ἄνω καὶ εἰσήνεγκάν µε εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν. 35 (8) And in the vision it was shown to me in this manner; behold, clouds in the vision were calling and mists of fog were beckoning me, and falling stars and lightning bolts were urging me and distracting me, and winds in my vision flew me up (9) and lifted me above and carried me into heaven.

After this statement Enoch goes on to describe in detail what he sees and experiences. The author’s imagery in telling his account underscores the radical difference between his world and the heavenly realm. Fire and snow can coexist in heaven, and everything consists of grandeur. In 14:18–20 he describes the throne of God:36 Ἐθεώρουν δὲ καὶ εἶδον θρόνον ὑψηλόν, καὶ τὸ εἶδος αὐτοῦ ὡσεὶ κρυστάλλινον, καὶ τροχὸς ὡς ἡλίου λάµποντος καὶ ὄρος χερουβίν. καὶ ὑποκάτω τοῦ θρόνου ἐξεπορεύοντο ποταµοὶ πυρὸς φλεγόµενοι, καὶ οὐκ ἐδυνάσθην ἰδεῖν. καὶ ἡ δόξα ἡ µεγάλη ἐκάθητο ἐπ’ αὐτῷ· τὸ περιβόλαιον αὐτοῦ ὡς εἶδος ἡλίου, λαµπρότερον καὶ λευκότερον πάσης χιόνος.37

34 Morton Smith (“Ascent to the Heavens and the Beginning of Christianity,” EranosJahrbuch 50 (1981), 403–429) argues that Paul does not speak of himself in these verses but of Jesus’s ascent. In a similar vein, Michael Goulder (“Visions and Revelations of the Lord [2 Corinthians 12:1–10]” in Paul and the Corinthians: Studies on a Community in Conflict: Essays in Honor of Margaret Thrall, eds. Trevor J. Burke and J. Keith Elliott, NovTSup 109 [Leiden: Brill, 2003]) also argues that Paul speaks of someone else in this episode. According to Goulder, he probably speaks of a fellow apostle (303–312). However, most scholars agree with the position presented here that Paul speaks of himself. Otherwise, the fact that he is given the thorn in the flesh as a result of these revelations makes no sense. 35 M. Black, ed. Apocalypsis Henochi Graece: Fragmenta Pseudepigraphorum Quae Supersunt Graeca, Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti Graece (Leiden: Brill, 1970). Author’s translation unless otherwise noted. 36 George W. E. Nickelsburg, I Enoch 1: A Commentary on the Book of I Enoch, Chapters 1–36; 81–108, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001), 260–1. Nickelsburg writes that “The earliest traditions in the [Book of Watchers] may predate the Hellenistic period, and the book as a whole was completed by the middle of the third century BCE” (7). 37 Black, Apocalypsis Henochi Graece.

136

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

(18) And I was looking and I saw an exalted throne, and its image as ice crystal, and a wheel shining as the sun and a mountain with cherubim. (19) And below the throne were rushing rivers of flaming fire and I was not able to see. (20) And the Great Glory was sitting on it; And his garment appeared as the sun, shining more brilliantly and whiter than any snow.

One notices immediately that although Enoch admits his inability to see, he does go on to describe God, the Great Glory. Enoch’s accounts differ greatly from Paul’s narrative with respect to elaboration. Enoch provides immense detail concerning what he saw and heard during his heavenly ascent. Other accounts of heavenly ascents contain similar details.38 When considering the possibility that Paul knew of other ascent accounts, it is interesting that he chooses not to divulge any specific details about what he saw. Such omissions indicate Paul’s disinterest in providing a detailed travel log filled with the sights, sounds, and wonders of the experience. Paul truncates the narration of his journey in order to focus his audience on the conflict around knowledge, his battle with the satanic angel, his weakness, and God’s power.39 What is most important for him is the reality and the consequence of this event, which ultimately reveal divine strength. In v. 4 Paul speaks of being taken up to παράδεισος. In the NT παράδεισος occurs two additional times, once in Luke 23:43 and once in Rev 2:7. The Luke passage depicts Paradise as the place inhabited by the righteous dead, whereas Revelation echoes Genesis and reverses the banishment of humanity from the tree of life. In the eschaton, the righteous will partake of the tree of life from which Adam and Eve could not eat. In the LXX the word “Paradise” appears in Genesis 2:8 for the Garden of Eden and is used in other places to denote Eden (Ezek. 28:13 and 31:8).40 Several texts link Paradise and a vision of God or Paradise and the third heaven. In the Life of Adam and Eve (Vita), when Adam goes to Paradise he sees God and his angels. Adam recounts what happened to his son Seth saying:

38

Ascent accounts are replete with details about what the visionary sees, hears, and experiences as he ascends through the heavens. The paucity of details Paul reveals is quite astonishing in light of other ascent accounts during this time period. However, Paul tends to zero in on what is most significant for his argument and for his audience. This tendency occurs earlier in the letter with his narrow focus in 11:3 on the serpent’s deception of Eve in the Genesis account. He does not elaborate upon the story or provide background but simply cites the relevant part of the story for his purposes. 39 Contra Gooder, Only the Third Heaven?, who attributes the “half-telling of the ascent narrative” to a failed ascent (201). 40 In 11:3 Paul echoes Genesis: The serpent deceives Eve in Paradise. With the term Paradise in 12:4, Paul again returns to a Genesis theme. Eve’s encounter with the serpent prefigures the Corinthians’ own experience with the satanic as well as Paul’s struggle with the angel of Satan. Paul’s protology shapes his cosmology and lies in the background of the subsequent description of his ascent.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

137

And I saw a chariot like the wind and its wheels were fiery. I was carried off into the Paradise of righteousness, and I saw the Lord sitting and his appearance was unbearable flaming fire. And many thousands of angels were at the right hand and at the left of the chariot.41

Here, Paradise is the place where one sees God and is filled with sights of awe and wonder. Two additional Jewish texts link the third heaven and Paradise and depict it as the place of God’s presence. First, the Greek Life of Adam and Eve narrates Adam’s transfer to Paradise by the archangel Michael: καὶ µετὰ ταῦτα ἐξέτεινεν τὴν χεῖρα αὐτοῦ ὁ πατὴρ τῶν ὅλων καθήµενος ἐπὶ θρόνου αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἦρεν τὸν Ἀδὰµ καὶ παρέδωκεν αὐτὸν τῷ ἀρχαγγέλῳ Μιχαήλ λέγων·ἆρον αὐτὸν εἰς τὸν παράδεισον ἕως τρίτου οὐρανοῦ. And after these things the father of all who sits upon his throne stretched out his hand and took Adam and handed him over to the archangel Michael saying, “Take him into Paradise to the third heaven.”42

And, again in 40:1 God speaks to Michael: µετὰ ταῦτα εἶπεν ὁ θεὸς τῷ ἀρχαγγέλῳ Μιχαὴλ·ἄπελθε εἰς τὸν παράδεισον ἐν τῷ τρίτῳ οὐρανῷ καὶ ἔνεγκε τρεῖς σινδόνας βυσσίνας καὶ σηρικάς.43 God orders the archangel to bring fine linen clothes to Paradise in the third heaven, so that Adam may be buried properly. Here, a link exists between Paradise and the third heaven which Paul mentions in 12:2. Second, in 2 Enoch 8:1, Enoch relates how he was brought to the third heaven and placed in the midst of Paradise: “And the men took me from there. They brought me up to the third heaven. And they placed me in the midst of Paradise.”44 Although these texts connect the third heaven and Paradise, it is important to note the existence of other texts that refer to a different number of heavens and to a different location for Paradise. Third Baruch refers to five heavens 41 Life of Adam and Eve (Vita) translated by Marshall D. Johnson, (“Life of Adam and Eve: A New Translation and Introduction,” in OTP, ed. James H. Charlesworth [New York: Doubleday, 1985], 2:266–268). Both Greek and Latin texts of the Life of Adam and Eve exist. The Greek texts (see below) are known as the Apocalypse of Moses and the Latin texts are known as Vita. A relationship between these texts exists, yet the nature of the relationship is difficult to determine. Johnson notes that “the problem is complicated by the fact that three episodes in the Latin have no direct counterpart in most manuscripts of the Greek: the repentance of Adam and Eve (1–11); Satan’s fall from heaven (12–16) and Adam’s ascension into the heavenly Paradise (25–29). Similarly, Eve’s story of the Fall in Apocalypse 15–30 has no complete parallel in Vita” (2:251). Johnson believes that the date for the work ranges from 100 BCE to 200 CE, with the end of the 1st century more likely (2:252). 42 This Greek text comes from Johannes Tromp, The Life of Adam and Eve in Greek: A Critical Edition, PVTG 6 (Leiden: Brill, 2005), 37:4b–5a. Translations from this Greek text are the author’s. 43 Ibid. 44 F. I. Andersen, trans., “2 Enoch,” in OTP, ed. James H. Charlesworth (New York: Doubleday, 1985), 1:115.

138

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

(11:1), and the Apocalypse of Abraham refers to seven (19:4), as do Ascension of Isaiah (9:6), and 2 Enoch (20:1). This disparity raises the question about the type of cosmology that frames Paul’s thinking. Paul’s language suggests a three-heaven cosmology in which the third heaven is the highest. His description of the visions and the revelations as ὑπερβολή (12:7) illustrates that these revelations were extraordinary in nature. If the apostle relies upon a cosmology with a number of heavens greater than three and relates that he only went to the third heaven, his experience would be deemed deficient.45 The sharing of a failed rapture would undercut his own description of the revelations as ὑπερβολή.46 His opponents could attack him for having an inferior experience in which he only reaches the middle stage. In 12:11 Paul asserts that one of his goals for sharing this extraordinary event is to illustrate God’s commendation of him (cf. 10:18), and so, a failed ascent would undermine this goal. Hence, Paul’s language corresponds to a three-heaven cosmology, which existed in some strands of Jewish tradition. Therefore, when Paul speaks of going to the third heaven and to Paradise he implies that he has seen the Lord.47 The verb used in 12:2 and in 12:4, ἁρπάζω, appears in other places in the New Testament. In 1 Thessalonians 4:17 Paul writes that the ones who are alive and remain will be snatched away or caught up into the clouds. In Acts 8:39 the Spirit of the Lord takes Philip away after he baptizes the Ethiopian eunuch. Also, Revelation 12:5 contains the story of the woman whose child receives deliverance from the dragon by being caught up and taken to God and his 45 Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 840; Gooder, Only the Third Heaven?, 201– 203; 210–215. 46 For a different view, see Lincoln, who believes that we cannot deduce what type of cosmology Paul adhered to based on this verse. “Undoubtedly Paul shared the cosmological views of his time but there are certain factors which indicate it may be wrong to try to pin him down to a particular number of heavens. The great variation in contemporary views, the fact that this is the only place where he mentions a number and that elsewhere he is quite unconcerned about numbers or system … could well indicate that here in II Corinthians 12:2 Paul has simply taken over the term ‘third heaven’ in a formal manner as a variant designation for Paradise” (Paradise Now and Not Yet, 79). However, he acknowledges that “There is much to be said for the view that the third heaven must have been the highest for Paul, for had he been thinking of another four heavens above his third heaven, this would have detracted somewhat from the force of his account” (78). 47 James Buchanan Wallace, Snatched into Paradise (2 Cor 12:1–10): Paul’s Heavenly Journey in the Context of Early Christian Experience (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2011), maintains that “Even 1 Enoch, which has but a single heaven, divides this heaven into three sections. The earliest stratum of T. Levi contains a three-heaven cosmology. Although evidence exists for the seven-heaven cosmology before 70 C.E., only after 70 does this cosmology become dominant, and even then, it is not the only possibility. Ultimately, internal evidence must provide the final decision, but the evidence favors three” (164). Other scholars who believe that Paul has seen the Lord include Tabor, Things Unutterable, 124; MorrayJones, “Paradise Revisited,” 277–278, 283 and Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:797.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

139

throne. In addition, the term appears in The Greek Life of Adam and Eve when Adam is taken away to heaven: ὅτε δὲ εἶπον τὰς φωνὰς ταύτας οἱ ἄγγελοι, ἰδοὺ ἦλθεν ἓν τῶν σεραφὶµ ἑξαπτερύγων καὶ ἥρπασεν τὸν Ἀδὰµ εἰς τὴν Ἀχερουσίαν λίµνην, καὶ ἀπέλουσεν αὐτὸν τρίτον, καὶ ἤγαγεν αὐτὸν ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ.48 And when the angels spoke these things, behold one of the seraphim who had six wings came and snatched Adam away into Lake Achaeron, and washed him three times, and led him before the presence of God.

In the Book of Parables, Enoch describes his ascent as one initiated from the heavenly realm. In 39:3 he declares, “And in those days a whirlwind snatched me up from the face of the earth and set me down within the confines of heaven.”49 Again in 52:1–2a Enoch affirms divine agency in his ascent. He writes, “After those days, in that place where I had seen all the visions of what is hidden – for I had been carried off in a whirlwind, and they had taken me to the West – There my eyes saw all the secrets of heaven that will take place.”50 Paul’s account, as well as each of these occurrences, emphasize that the divine takes the initiative in moving the person from one place to another, as in the case of Philip, or from one realm to another, as indicated in the ascents.51 Similarly, Paul characterizes his ascent as one that originates with God and not with him. Tabor argues that in verses 2–4 Paul relays a two-stage ascent, not one. Paul goes to the third heaven and then goes beyond this level to Paradise. One of Tabor’s reasons for arguing for a two-stage ascent is the redundancy of vv. 3– 4. Paul, for the most part, repeats v. 2, substituting the term Paradise for the phrase third heaven and adding that he heard unutterable words. Because of the redundant nature of Paul’s language and Paul’s additions in these verses, Tabor contends that Paul is not describing a one-stage ascent but two, with vv. 3–4

48

Tromp, Life of Adam and Eve, 37:3 (author’s translation). George W. E. Nickelsburg and James C. VanderKam, trans., 1 Enoch: A New Translation (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2004). 50 Ibid. 51 See also Jub 4:23. As Martha Himmelfarb states, “Paul’s experience is an example of rapture, that is, being taken up to heaven at God’s initiative” (“The Practice of Ascent in the Ancient Mediterranean World” in Death, Ecstasy, and Other Worldly Journeys, eds. John J. Collins and Michael Fishbane [Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995], 128). Himmelfarb rightly observes that “Not only is there no allusion to a technique of any kind, but Paul actually calls the experience rapture” (129). So Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet, 81 and Maier, “Das Gefährdungsmotiv bei der Himmelsreise,” 25. Interpreters who view this passage as evidence for techniques to induce rapture include Segal, Paul the Convert, 36, and Morton Smith, “Ascent to the Heavens and the Beginning of Christianity,” EranosJahrbuch 50 (1981), 414–415. 49

140

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

characterizing the further ascent into Paradise.52 The table below, taken from Tabor’s monograph, highlights the repetitive nature of Paul’s language. I know a man in Christ (v.2)

And I know that this man (v.3)

fourteen years ago (v.2) whether in the body or out of the body I do not know (v. 2)

whether in the body or separate from the body I do not know (v.3)

God knows (v.2)

God knows (v.3)

was caught up to the third heaven (v.2)

was caught up into Paradise (v.4) he heard words which are unlawful to speak (v.4) 53

Figure 3.2 Repetitive Language in Paul’s Ascent There have been several counter-arguments against Tabor’s view. One is that Paul only gives one date for the ascent. If the ascent occurred in two stages, he would have provided two dates.54 Additional counter-arguments view Paul’s repetition as serving several purposes: (1) it emphasizes the fantastic and mysterious nature of the event; (2) it highlights God’s initiative in the experience; and (3) it characterizes the concept of Semitic parallelism in which the second element takes up the first element, carrying it further and intensifying its effect.55 One could also add, as mentioned previously, that Paul’s repetitive language stresses the limitations of human knowledge and underscores the significance of God’s knowledge. For these reasons, Paul’s repetition does not necessarily point to a two-stage but a one-stage ascent, with the word Paradise indicating a more precise location of the part of the third heaven to which he was caught up. 56 Also, as Morray-Jones argues, an ascent from the first to the third heaven and on to Paradise in the seventh has no parallel in apocalyptic or Jewish mystical literature. 52

Tabor, Things Unutterable, 119–120. Ibid., 114 (italics his; versification and title of table added). 54 Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 842; Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet, 53

77. 55

Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 841. Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:356–7. So Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet, who writes, “The parallelism of the narrative has given rise to discussion whether Paul might not be describing either two separate events or two separate stages within one experience. But as we shall see there is no decisive evidence that Paul considered Paradise to be one stage further along than the third heaven on his heavenly journey, and since there is only 56

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

141

Normally the ascent through all six lower levels to the seventh is described (or at least mentioned) unless (as at Rev. 4:1–2, for example) the visionary proceeds directly to the highest heaven without mention of intervening levels. Nowhere, to my knowledge, does the elevator stop, so to speak, on only one intermediate floor. Since there is evidence for an alternative, and probably earlier, three-heaven cosmology, it seems most natural to assume that this is the model employed by Paul.57

In light of these arguments, a one-stage ascent is more likely, especially since Paul does not use any language that supports a two-stage ascent such as ἐκεῖθεν or µετὰ ταύτα, which would illustrate that he has moved from one level to another.58 Paul reiterates that he does not know whether the experience took place inside or outside the body, which may suggest that he was aware of the different possible modes of ascent. A number of texts reveal that ascents can occur as journeys of the spirit, soul, or body. In the Book of Parables 71:1, 5, Enoch’s spirit ascends: 71:1 And after that, my spirit was taken away, and it ascended to heaven. And I saw the sons of the holy angels, and they were stepping on flames of fire; 71:5 And he took my spirit – even me, Enoch – to the heaven of heavens and I saw there, as it were, built of hailstones and between those stones were tongues of living fire.59

In Plutarch’s De Sera Numinis Vindicta there is an ascent of the soul in which Aridaeus experiences a transport after falling and injuring himself. Ἐπεὶ γὰρ ἐξέπεσε τὸ φρονοῦν τοῦ σώµατος οἷον ἄν τις ἐκ πλοίου κυβερνήτης εἰς βυθὸν ἀπορριφεὶς πάθοι τὸ πρῶτον, οὕτως ὑπὸ τῆς µεταβολῆς ἔσχεν·εἶτα µικρὸν ἐξαρθεὶς ἔδοξεν ἀναπνεῖν ὅλος καὶ περιορᾶν πανταχόθεν, ὥσπερ ἑνὸς ὄµµατος ἀνοιχθείσης τῆς ψυχῆς. ἑώρα δὲ τῶν πρότερον οὐθὲν ἀλλ’ ἤ τὰ ἄστρα παµµεγέθη καὶ ἀπέχοντα πλῆθος ἀλλήλων ἄπλετον, αὐγήν τε τῇ χρόᾳ θαυµαστὴν ἀφιέντα καὶ τόνον ἔχουσαν, ὥστε τὴν ψυχὴν ἐποχουµένην λείως πλοῖον ὥσπερ ἐν γαλήνῃ τῷ φωτὶ ῥᾳδίως πάντῃ καὶ ταχὺ διαφέρεσθαι. For after his mind came out of his body, at first he was somewhat like a captain of a boat being plunged into the depths, it was in this manner that he experienced a change; then it seemed he was being raised up a little, breathing completely and seeing from every side, as if his soul was one opened eye. And at first he was seeing nothing except the stars being immense in size and having great space from one another, emitting marvelous rays with

one reference to a date at the beginning of the first part and the content of the experience is only mentioned at the conclusion of the second part, it is most likely that, because of his reluctance to reveal this highly personal and cherished incident, Paul begins and then in a halting manner and with a minimum of variation has to repeat himself before he can bring himself to conclude the account” (77). 57 Morray-Jones, “Paradise Revisited,” 278. 58 Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 842. Harris also asks the valuable pointed question: “Why would Paul mention the third heaven if nothing of consequence happened there?” (842). 59 Nickelsburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch, 93.

142

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

color and having intensity, so that his soul was being carried to the light smoothly like a boat in the calm with all ease, traveling through.60

From this account it appears that Aridaeus experiences a separation of his soul from his body. But further on in the narrative a conversation occurs between Aridaeus and his relative, who explains the event. Ἐνταῦθα µίαν ἔφη γνῶναι συγγενοῦς τινος, οὐ µέντοι σαφῶς· ἀποθανεῖν γὰρ ἔτι παιδὸς ὄντος· ἀλλ’ ἐκείνην προσανάγουσαν ἐγγὺς εἰπεῖν· “χαῖρε Θεσπέσιε.” Θαυµάσαντος δὲ αὐτοῦ καὶ φήσαντος ὡς οὐ Θεσπέσιος ἀλλ’ Ἀριδαῖος ἐστιν, “πρότερόν γε,” φάναι, “τὸ δὲ ἀπὸ τοῦδε Θεσπέσιος. Οὐδὲ γὰρ τοι τέθνηκας, ἀλλὰ µοίρᾳ τινὶ θεῶν ἥκεις δεῦρο τῷ φρονοῦντι, τὴν δὲ ἄλλην ψυχὴν ὥσπερ ἀγκύριον ἐν τῷ σώµατι καταλέλοιπας.” There, he said, he recognized one [soul] that belonged to a relative, although not clearly, for when he died, he was still a child; but that [soul] came near and said, “Greetings Thespius.” And when he marveled and said “I am not Thespius but Aridaeus,” it said “You were before, but from now on you are Thespius. For surely you did not die but by some lot of the gods you have come here in your mind having left the rest of your soul behind like an anchor in your body.”61

Here Aridaeus does not undergo a complete separation of his soul from his body. Only one part of his soul, his intelligence, has risen apart from his body.62 This episode indicates the existence of an understanding in which souls or parts of souls ascend without the body. Also, in Plutarch’s De Genio Socratis, the story of Timarchus relates a separation of the soul from the body. He tells what happens after going down into the crypt of Trophonius: Ἔφη δὲ καταβὰς εἰς τὸ µαντεῖον περιτυχεῖν σκότῳ πολλῷ τὸ πρῶτον, εἶτα ἐπευξάµενος κεῖσθαι πολὺν χρόνον οὐ µάλα συµφρονῶν ἐναργῶς εἴτ’ ἐγρήγορεν εἴτε ὀνειροπολεῖ· πλὴν δόξαι γε τῆς κεφαλῆς ἅµα ψόφῳ προσπεσόντι πληγείσης τὰς ῥαφὰς διαστάσας µεθιέναι τὴν ψυχήν. ὡς δ’ ἀναχωροῦσα κατεµίγνυτο πρὸς ἀέρα διαυγῆ καὶ καθαρὸν ἀσµένη, πρῶτον µὲν ἀναπνεῦσαι τότε δοκεῖν διὰ χρόνου συχνοῦ, τεινοµένην τέως, καὶ πλείονα γίνεσθαι τῆς πρότερον ὥσπερ ἱστίον ἐκπεταννυµένην… He said that on descending into the oracular crypt his first experience was of profound darkness; next, after a prayer, he lay a long time not clearly aware whether he was awake or dreaming. It did seem to him, however, that at the same moment he heard a crash and was struck on the head, and that the sutures parted and released his soul. As it withdrew and mingled joyfully with air that was translucent and pure, it felt in the first place that now, after long being cramped, it had again found relief, and was growing larger than before, spreading out like a sail.63

This story provides additional evidence that knowledge about the ascent of souls existed. The soul’s ascent is described as a release from the body, which holds the soul captive. 60

Plutarch, Sera 563 E–F (author’s translation). Ibid., 564 C (author’s translation). 62 At the end of the experience, Aridaeus’ soul or mind suddenly returns to his body (568). 63 Plutarch, Gen. Socr. 590 B–C (De Lacy and Einarson, LCL). 61

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

143

Philo also speaks of the beauty of the soul’s freedom from the body. He writes: Ψυχαὶ µὲν γὰρ ἄσαρκοι καὶ ἀσώµατοι ἐν τῷ τοῦ παντὸς θεάτρῳ διηµερεύουσαι θεαµάτων καὶ ἀκουσµάτων θείων, ὧν ἄπληστος αὐτὰς εἰσελήλυθεν ἔρως, µηδενὸς κωλυσιεργοῦντος ἀπολαύουσιν. ὅσαι δὲ τὸν σαρκῶν φόρτον ἀχθοφοροῦσι, βαρυνόµεναι καὶ πιεζόµεναι ἄνω µὲν βλέπειν εἰς τὰς οὐρανίους περιόδους ἀδυνατοῦσι, κάτω δέ ἑλκυσθεῖσαι τὸν αὐχένα βιαίως δίκην τετραπόδων γῇ προσερρίζωνται. For souls without flesh and body pass their days in the theater of the universe, seeing and hearing divine things, which they have desired with an unquenchable love and with a joy that none can obstruct. But those bearing the weight of the flesh, burdened and oppressed, are unable as they orbit to look up into the heavens, but have necks that are bent down, forced to stand like four-footed animals planted on the ground.64

Philo is aware of the soul’s separation from the body and its ability to grasp divine things when apart from the flesh. Sources also exist where bodily ascents occur. In the Book of Parables 39:3 Enoch’s body ascends to heaven: “And in those days a whirlwind snatched me up from the face of the earth and set me down within the confines of the heavens.”65 In the Testament of Abraham 8:1–3 a reference appears to a bodily ascent where God commands Michael to bring Abraham on a chariot. And Michael went up in the heavens and spoke before the Lord concerning Abraham. And the Lord answered Michael, “Go and take up Abraham in the body and show him everything, and whatever he says to you, do (it), as (you would) for him who is my friend.” Then Michael left and took Abraham up onto a cloud in the body and bore him up to the river Oceanus.66

That Paul does not know how to classify his experience adds to the authenticity of this event. Heininger aptly remarks about the apostle’s inability to distinguish the precise nature of the encounter. He writes, “Alles andere läßt Paulus offen: ‘er weiß es nicht, er entscheidet es nicht, er stellt die Antwort einfach Gott anheim.’” 67 He knows that heavenly raptures can take place with or without the body but he cannot specifically relate the method by which he entered the third heaven; he can only relate that it happened. The unspeakable words (ἄρρητα ῥήµατα) Paul cannot share have long been recognized as a technical term for the mysteries.68 Plutarch uses the term in De Iside et Osiride where he speaks of hidden mystical rites: ὅσα τε µυστικοῖς ἱεροῖς 64

Philo, Gig. 7.31 (author’s translation); cf. Leg., 2.15.53–56. Nickelsburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch. 66 Ed P. Sanders, “Testament of Abraham: Recension B,” in OTP, ed. James H. Charlesworth (New York: Doubleday, 1985), 1:899. See also 14:7 where Abraham’s soul and body are separated at his death, and his soul goes up to heaven. 67 Heininger, Paulus als Visionär, 250, quoting H. J. Klauck. 68 Hans Windisch, Der Zweite Korintherbrief (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1924), 377–378. 65

144

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

περικαλυπτόµενα καὶ τελεταῖς ἄρρητα διασῴζεται καὶ ἀθέατα πρὸς τοὺς πολλούς, ὅµοιον ἔχει λόγον. 69 Although the word ἀπόρρητα or ἄρρητα does not appear in Philostratus’ Life of Apollonius, there is an allusion to the practice of silence surrounding the mysteries. The following quote occurs in a context in which a king noisily enters an Indian village and his raucous entrance meets the disapproval of Iarchas, an Indian sage. The sage compares his pompous ingress with Phraotes who, unlike the king, knows how to arrive quietly and with reverence: “εἰ δὲ Φραώτης … καταλύων ἐτύγχανεν, εἶδες ἄν ὥσπερ ἐν µυστηρίῳ σιωπῆς µεστὰ πάντα”; “If it were Phraotes who was halting here, you would find a dead silence prevailing everywhere as if you were attending a mystery.”70 Such a reference supports the view that mysteries were often shrouded in secrecy, and silence was considered the appropriate religious response. Philo employs the term ἀπόρρητα to refer to the mind’s contemplation of godly things: οὐ γὰρ πᾶσιν ἐπιτρεπτέον τά θεοῦ καθορᾶν ἀπόρρητα, ἀλλὰ µὸνοις τοῖς δυναµένοις αὐτὰ περιστὲλλειν καὶ φυλάττειν. “For not to all must leave be given to contemplate the secret things of God, but only to those who are able to hide and guard them.” 71 Again, in 3.27, Philo writes, τίνι οὖν ψυχῇ ἀποκρύπτειν καὶ ἀφανίζειν κακίαν ἐγένετο, εἰ µὴ ᾗ ὁ θεὸς ἐνεφανίσθη, ἣν καὶ τῶν ἀπορρήτων µυστηρίων ἠξίωσε; “What soul, then, was it that succeeded in hiding away wickedness and removing it from sight, but the soul to which God manifested himself, and which he deemed worthy of his secret mysteries?”72 Philo’s use indicates the appropriation of the term outside of a Hellenistic mystery context, which corresponds to Paul’s own use. 73 3.2.2 Textual Analysis 12:5–6 (5) ὑπὲρ τοῦ τοιούτου καυχήσοµαι, ὑπὲρ δὲ ἐµαυτοῦ οὐ καυχήσοµαι εἰ µὴ ἐν ταῖς ἀσθενείαις. (6) ἐὰν γὰρ θελήσω καυχήσασθαι, οὐκ ἔσοµαι ἄφρων, ἀλήθειαν γὰρ ἐρῶ· φείδοµαι δέ, µή τις εἰς ἐµὲ λογίσηται ὑπὲρ ὃ βλέπει µε ἢ ἀκούει [τι] ἐξ ἐµοῦ (5) In behalf of such a one I will boast, but in behalf of myself I will not boast except in weaknesses. (6) For if I should want to boast, I will not be foolish, for I would speak the truth. But I refrain, lest someone thinks in regard to me above what he sees in me or hears from me.

Verse 5 points backward and forward. The first half highlights Paul’s willingness to boast about the person in vv. 1–4, for Paul can boast about the one caught up to the third heaven since this person’s experience takes place due to 69

Plutarch, Is. Os. 360 F. Cited by Windisch, Der Zweite Korintherbrief, 377. Philostratus, Life of Apollonius 3.26 (Jones, LCL). 71 Philo, Leg. 2.57; cited also by Charles K. Barrett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, HNTC (New York: Harper & Row, 1973), 311. 72 Ibid., 3.27. See also Philo, De somnis, 1.191, as well as Quod deterius potiori insidari solet, 175f. 73 See Barrett, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 311. 70

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

145

divine action and initiative. The Lord grants visions and revelations, snatches him to Paradise in the third heaven, and allows him to hear unspeakable words. By boasting about this person Paul boasts in the Lord (10:17). On the other hand, Paul declares that although he will boast about the person who journeys into the third heaven, about himself he will only boast concerning his weaknesses. The latter half of verse 5 echoes the apostle’s earlier declarations in 10:17 and 11:30 and points forward to verses 12:6–10. Paul will boast only about his weaknesses, some of which he enumerates in chapter 11. In the next few verses he will elaborate further: the angel of Satan who attacks him is another example of his weakness. In verse 6, Paul maintains that if he really wanted to boast, he could. And if he did, he would not engage in foolish boasting, the type of boasting which is unprofitable (12:1), but would indeed speak truth. In the apostle’s words, a fool lies and boasts about things that are really not true. This reference to his truthfulness corresponds to his earlier statement in 11:31 that he is not lying about his experiences. Such references in 11:31 and here in 12:6 implicitly contrast him with the false apostles, whom he previously characterized as liars in 11:13–15. They do not speak truth, and even their boasting cannot be trusted.74 On the contrary, the Corinthians can trust Paul, who glories in his weaknesses rather than his strengths. In v. 6a, however, Paul declares that if he were to brag about himself apart from weaknesses, he could. Harris notices this possibility for the apostle, stating, “Lest the Corinthians should imagine that Paul had nothing to boast about in addition to his weaknesses (cf. v.5), he now disabuses them of that possible misunderstanding.”75 Harris’s insight calls attention to the apostle’s allusion that he could talk about the glorious aspects of what he saw in the third heaven and he could elaborate on the sights during the journey there. But as he states in v. 6b, he refrains from this type of speech and instead decides to focus on the aspect of the experience that underscores his weakness. 76 Moreover, in v.6,

74

Barnett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 564. Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 848. 76 This is a nuanced version of Harris’s view. He considers all of Paul’s visions and revelations as well as his status and accomplishments as his strengths (Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 848). All of these things are what Paul refers to when he says he could boast if he wanted. Harris rightfully asserts that Paul can boast apart from weaknesses if he so desires. However, Paul speaks specifically about visions and revelations here. More importantly, he refers to the glorious aspects of the visions and revelations, which he conspicuously leaves out of his narration. In other ascent narratives, these details of heavenly journeys are thorough and in abundance, and so Paul’s skeleton account of his journey provides a stark contrast. His decision not to brag about this experience causes him to leave out such information. Instead, he focuses on the part of the ascent that highlights his weakness and demonstrates the conflict surrounding knowledge. In short, the apostle’s determination to glory only in weaknesses and to relay only the details of the trip relevant to the Corinthian 75

146

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

Paul finally lets the Corinthian audience know that the person of whom he speaks is himself. He refrains from boasting so that no one may think (λογίζοµαι) beyond what they see in him or hear from him.77 Here λογίζοµαι has the sense of “make an evaluation” or “form a judgment.”78 As in previous verses, Paul once again concerns himself with the Corinthians’ thinking (10:2, 4, 11; 11:5) and he wants them to think and form an accurate evaluation of him based on what they see and hear from him, not on what they see and hear from others (10:2, 10; 11:5, 22–23). Paul’s focus on seeing and hearing him adds an important perspective to his account, and Heininger offers critical insight into the significance of seeing and hearing in heavenly journeys.79 These sensory functions are essential for the traveler as well as for the audience to whom the traveler relays the experience. Although Paul does not give an extended recitation of what he sees or hears, he does say that he sees the Lord (12:1), hears things he cannot share (12:4), and receives a divine word that he can communicate (12:9). Yet as noted above, the apostle gives no elaborate details about the Erfahrung, and such brevity of detail causes Heininger to suggest that Paul in 12:6, unlike other heavenly travelers, moves the emphasis from seeing and hearing specifics about the heavenly journey to seeing and hearing him. He asserts: “‘Visonäres Objekt’ sind nicht mehr die himmlischen Dinge, sondern Paulus selbst, womit zugleich ein Rollenwechsel einhergeht: War es eingangs noch Paulus, von dem ‘Erscheinungen und Enthüllungen’(12,1) gefordert wurden, stehen jetzt plötzlich die Korinther als ‘Visionäre’ da.”80 Heininger’s observations suggest that with his language of seeing and hearing him in 12:6 Paul invites the Corinthians to become visionaries and auditors. 81 The one who has experienced such an event now, in turn, becomes a means of revelation.

situation account for the differences between his sparsely narrated heavenly journey and the journey narratives of others. 77 Paul uses ὑπέρ in several places in this letter. He uses it to describe the super-apostles (11:5), to show that he is a better servant than them because of his immense suffering (11:23), and in 12:6 he uses it to admonish others not to think more of him than they should. He will continue this pattern in 12:7, where he employs ὑπέρ to refer to the nature of his revelations (12:7) and to being exalted. 78 Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 849. 79 Heininger, Paulus als Visionär, 249. Some of the texts he cites for this understanding include Plutarch, Gen. Socr. 21 (Mor 590B): “Timarchos erzählte uns θαυµάσια καὶ ἰδεῖν καὶ ἀκοῦσαι; Luc., Icaromenipp 2: Menipp kehrt gerade von der Himmelsreise zurück θαυµάσια καὶ ἀκούσας καὶ ἰδῶν; Vit Ad 25,1 (s.u.); schließlich Offb 22,8: ‘Ich, Johannes, habe dies gehört und gesehen (ὁ ἀκούων καὶ βλέπων). Und als ich es hörte und sah (ἤκουσα καὶ ἔβλεψα), fiel ich dem Engel, der mir dies gezeigt hatte, zu Füßen, um ihn anzubeten.’” Cf. a text cited above, Philo, Gig. 7.31, which refers to seeing and hearing in the context of an ascent. 80 Heininger, Paulus als Visionär, 249. 81 Ibid.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

147

Paul’s depiction of himself as a visionary object coheres with our earlier discussion in which he, like the Teacher in the Teacher Hymns, becomes a means of divine insight.82 Paul’s heavenly journey allows him to disclose important revelations to the Corinthians, for his experience enables him to expose the existence of conflict around knowledge of God due to his own struggle with the angel of Satan, and his encounter reveals the reality of God’s presence in the midst of evil and weakness. This account provides both Paul and the Corinthians with significant insight into the earthly and heavenly realms.83 In 12:7–10 Paul will further specify what he desires the Corinthians to see and hear. We will outline the details briefly here since an in-depth discussion follows below. Paul presents the Corinthians with an embattled apostle who faces the attacks of an angel of Satan. Unlike a heavenly guide who aids Paul in his ascent, Paul’s angelophany involves an angel of Satan who attempts to hinder his ascents. The apostle thus reveals to the Corinthians that he, like them, faces a satanic adversary. Furthermore, Paul allows them to hear the word of the Lord that comes to him as a result of this satanic attack. God’s word of grace and power to the apostle is a word to him in his circumstance, but also a divine word to the Corinthians in their own battle with evil. If the Corinthians can truly hear and see Paul for who he is – one upon whom God’s power rests – they will reject the different gospel, the different spirit, and ultimately the false apostles (11:4). They will see that true servants of God are weak and that through weaknesses God’s power flows. In human weakness and human incapacity, God’s grace becomes evident. The fact that Paul does not want them to evaluate him beyond what they see or hear from him suggests that he sees himself as an instrument of revelation. His revelatory experience and his subsequent revelatory role come about through God’s initiative. Heininger notes that Paul also connects seeing and hearing in 1 Corinthians 2:6–16.84 There the apostle indicates a relationship between seeing and hearing and revelations. Through the Spirit, God reveals (ἀπεκάλυψεν) to believers things formerly unseen and unheard (2:9–10).85 Significantly, in Philippians 4:9 Paul admonishes the Corinthians that the “things which you learned, and 82 Paul’s role as mediator of divine revelation continues in 12:9 when Paul invites the Corinthians to hear the Lord’s words to him. These words to Paul become the Lord’s words to the Corinthians as well. 83 This view differs from Heininger, who writes, “Derartige Erlebnisse taugen weder zur charismatischen Selbstdarstellung (Gegner) noch bringen sie den von solchen Erfahrungen nicht unmittelbar Betroffenen, also den Korinthern, irgendeinen besonderen Erkenntnisgewinn ein” (Paulus als Visionär, 253, emphasis mine). 84 Heininger, Paulus als Visionär, 249. 85 Cf. discussion of this pericope in Shane Berg, “Sin’s Corruption of the Knowledge of God and the Law in Romans 1–8,” in The Unrelenting God: God’s Action in Scripture: Essays in Honor of Beverly Roberts Gaventa, eds. David J. Downs and Matthew L. Skinner (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2013), 119–138.

148

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

received, and heard (ἠκούσατε), and saw (εἴδετε) in me, do these things.” Although the term revelation does not appear here in Philippians, the combination of seeing and hearing is present nonetheless.86 Similar to the Philippians, Paul requests the Corinthians to take note of what they see and hear from him in light of his heavenly encounter, because this episode has revelatory value for him and for them. 87 Paul’s declaration that he will boast only of his weaknesses becomes clearer in the following verses. The apostle knows that his weaknesses make room for God’s power to rest upon him (12:9), for even his experience of the third heaven showcases his weakness and God’s power. The experience will encourage his audience not to think more of him than they should but to see God at work in spite of evil and conflict. 3.2.3 Textual Analysis 12:7 (7) καὶ τῇ ὑπερβολῇ τῶν ἀποκαλύψεων. διὸ88 ἵνα µὴ ὑπεραίρωµαι, ἐδόθη µοι σκόλοψ τῇ σαρκί, ἄγγελος σατανᾶ, ἵνα µε κολαφίζῃ, ἵνα µὴ ὑπεραίρωµαι.89 (7) And because of the extraordinary nature of the revelations; indeed, for this very reason in order that I may not be lifted up, a thorn in the flesh was given to me, an angel of Satan, in order to strike me, so that I may not be lifted up.90

86

For additional pairings of seeing and hearing in Paul see Rom 11:8; 15:21. Both Barnett (The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 565) and Harris (Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 850–851) discuss the importance of the pairing of seeing and hearing in this verse. Their view of its significance differs from the position presented here. Barnett writes that Paul wants them “to relate to him (1) by ordinary observation, by what they ‘see’ in him, that is, his ‘weaknesses,’ and (2) by what they ‘hear’ from him, that is, by his preaching of Christ” (565). Harris states, “In Paul’s case the reference would be to all his behavior as a person and as a missionary-pastor, and to all his preaching and teaching….” (850). 88 The διὸ is somewhat problematic. It is absent in some witnesses (P46 D Ψ 1881 lat sa Irenaeus), but it does occur in a number of other manuscripts A B F G 0243 33 81 1175 1739 pc syrh bo and is the more difficult reading. See Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (Freiburg: Freiburger Graphische Betriebe, 1994), 516. 89 This last phrase does not appear in some manuscripts, probably because of its redundant nature. However, it does appear in a number of witnesses P46 B 81 614 1739 0243 0278 syrp,h. See Metzger, A Textual Commentary, 517. A discussion of the importance of the redundancy follows below in 3.2.3.2. 90 V.7a has been interpreted in a number of ways. Harris aptly lays out the choices (Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 851–853) some of which follows: One option is to see it as a continuation of v. 6 in which Paul gives two reasons why he restrains himself: “But I refrain, lest any one should credit me…, and because of the marvelous character of the revelations. It was for this reason…” (851). Another option is to take the καί in the beginning of v.7 as epexegetic and explanatory which gives rise to a number of ways to render this part of the verse: “But I am declining to do this, so that no one can credit me with something beyond what one may see me doing or hear from me, specifically, because of the extraordinary char87

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

149

In verses 5–6 Paul claims that he will not boast about his Erlebnis. In verse 7, with the reappearance of ἀποκάλυψις from 12:1, he returns to the discussion about the experience itself.91 The resumptive καί along with the dative of reference continues the narration. The term ὑπερβολή refers to the extraordinary nature and the extraordinary number of revelations Paul experiences. More than likely, Paul is intentionally ambiguous here because the vast amount and the exceptional character of the revelations occasions the apostle’s reception of a σκόλοψ τῇ σαρκί. If the Corinthians had any doubt as to the person Paul refers in vv. 2–4, verse 7 explicitly informs them that he speaks of himself. The boast in his weakness and his boast in the person who journeyed to the third heaven are one and the same. Paul’s phrase τῇ σαρκί recalls his earlier usage of flesh in chapters 10–11. Chapter 2 of this project demonstrated that flesh denotes weakness, instability, the apostle’s body, human credentials such as lineage, and living in the old age. In 10:2 he acknowledges that he lives “in flesh,” but does not live or wage war according to the flesh. The recurrence of the phrase “in flesh” in 12:7 implies that the thorn affects his flesh, i.e. his body. Such language underscores the weakness of his flesh and the susceptibility of his body to satanic attack. It also reiterates why fleshly weapons have no place in this cosmic conflict, for the thorn affects his flesh but does not originate from a fleshly source. Rather, it originates from a cosmic one and only divine power and divine weapons suffice. The identity of the thorn in the flesh has preoccupied interpreters throughout the centuries. The proposals fall into three general categories: 1) some kind of spiritual torment, 2) human opponents, or 3) some kind of illness. The types of

acter of the revelations” (851, quoting Furnish, II Corinthians, 513). Barnett provides another option, which is to view 7a as continuing v.5, in which Paul states, “I will not boast except in weaknesses … and in the abundance of revelations” (Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 567). One could also hold all of v. 7 together, which is the preferred reading here. So also Barnett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 567; Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 852–3; Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:802–805; Furnish, II Corinthians, 513; and Martin, 2 Corinthians. Heininger (Paulus als Visionär, 243) takes v.7a as continuing the thought of v.6. 91 In including v. 7 as part of the ascent account this study follows Morray-Jones, “Paradise Revisited”; Robert M. Price, “Punished in Paradise: (An Exegetical Theory on 2 Corinthians 12:1–10)” JSNT 7 (1980); and Gooder, Only the Third Heaven?. Unlike Price, however, I do not think that one can pinpoint when the angel of Satan appears nor that Paul heard the Lord’s words (v.9a) while he was in Paradise. The apostle specifically says that what he heard in Paradise he cannot repeat. Nonetheless, Paul perceives the angel of Satan episode as part of the ascent account because the extraordinary revelations precipitated its occurrence. These extraordinary revelations occurred during his ascent. The angel of Satan appears in order to block him from receiving any further revelations but the Lord’s statement in 9a implies that Satan’s attempt is unsuccessful.

150

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

spiritual torment under the first proposal range from sexual temptations92 to a more generalized spiritual weakness and sin. 93 Philippe Menoud suggests that Paul’s concern for the Jews’ unbelief in the gospel is the thorn.94 Johannes J. Thierry contends that the thorn consists of the refusal of others to recognize the legitimacy of Paul’s apostleship because of his murderous past and such refusal creates agony for Paul.95 The argument of the present work, that Paul faces an angelic adversary, falls roughly into this category of spiritual torment and will be discussed further below. The proponents of the second proposal believe Paul’s language refers to a personal external source of affliction. For them, the thorn symbolizes the adversaries that Paul faces in his various communities. Such a view, they argue, corresponds to the term’s usage in the Hebrew Bible, in which the word σκόλοψ describes Israel’s enemies (Num 33:55; Ezek 28:24).96 However, the “human opponent” proposal presents several problems. First, the idea that the thorn alludes to the general opposition Paul faced wherever he went does not take into account the specific nature of the thorn. Paul’s language suggests a particular entity and not some generalized occurrence. Relatedly, the singular phrase “angel of satan” does not suggest a group of people whether in or outside Corinth, but rather a certain opponent. Second, the thorn cannot refer to present opponents in Corinth since the thorn began to affect Paul fourteen years earlier and this dating precedes Paul’s founding of the Corinthian congregations. 97 Equally important to these observations is that this proposal does not explain the link Paul makes between the appearance of the thorn and revelations. How are these two phenomena related? What do revelations and 92 Furnish, II Corinthians, 548 notes that this interpretation was popular during the Middle Ages. 93 Ibid. 94 Philippe H. Menoud, “The Thorn in the Flesh and Satan’s Angel (2 Cor. 12.7),” in Jesus Christ and the Faith: A Collection of Studies, trans. Eunice M. Paul (Pittsburgh: Pickwick, 1978), 24–27. 95 Johannes J. Thierry (“Der Dorn im Fleische [2 Κοr. 12:7–8]” NovT 5 [1962]) writes, “in den Versen 2 Kor. xi 13–15 versucht Paulus die schreckliche und im Zusammenhang mit seinem Vorleben so peinliche Tatsache zu verdrängen, dass sie ihn nicht als Apostel anerkennen wollten, ihn vielmehr als einen ἄγγελος σατανᾶ (µετασχηµατιζόµενος εἰς ἄγγελον φωτός), schilderten, als eine Gestalt aus dem Reiche der Finsternis, als einen, der da wandelt in dem Wege des Todes. Man wird denn auch annehmen dürfen, dass dies der Dorn im Fleische des Apostels gewesen sei. Die Antwort, die er vom Herrn bekommt, nachdem er dreimal gebetet hatte, bestätigt durch das Wort χάρις, dass es sich um sein angezweifeltes Apostelamt handelt” (308–309). 96 Jerome Murphy-O’Connor, The Theology of the Second Letter to the Corinthians, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 119; Craig S. Keener, 1–2 Corinthians, NCBC (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005); Terence Mullins outlines this position in detail in his article, “Paul’s Thorn in the Flesh,” JBL 76 (1957): 299–303. 97 So also Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:812.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

151

visions have to do with the appearance of human opponents? Furthermore, Paul identifies Satan as transforming himself into an angel in 11:14, but he calls his rivals Satan’s διάκονοι (11:15).98 He does not call them angels of Satan. Moreover, Paul often uses the term ἄγγελος to refer to suprahuman entities, not human rivals. In 1 Corinthians 4:9 he writes that apostles have been made a theatrical spectacle τῷ κόσµῳ καὶ ἀγγέλοις καὶ ἀνθρώποις. This phrase provides a glimpse into how Paul views the world. He describes what he believes the cosmos consists of – a supernatural realm with angels and an earthly realm that includes human beings. The passage indicates that Paul perceives humans and angels as distinct entities. Paul further believes that humans will judge the angels at the end time, as he writes in 1 Corinthians 6:3. Here again he separates the two. Also, in 1 Corinthians 13:1 Paul writes that believers can speak γλώσσαις τῶν ἀγγέλων. His language indicates that angelic speech differs from human speech, again underscoring two types of beings. His statement in 1 Corinthians 11:10 that a woman has power on her head because of the angels has created no little discussion as to what he means. 99 At any rate, it is probable that Paul once again uses the term ἄγγελος as a reference to suprahuman entities and not human beings. Outside of the Corinthian correspondence, the same tendency exists in which the term refers to supernatural agents and not humans or human opponents. For example, in Romans 8:38 he refers to angels as suprahuman entities who try to separate humans from the love of God. Paul declares to the Galatians that if an angel comes from heaven preaching another gospel, they should not listen to him (Gal 1:8), and he also maintains that angels played a role in the giving of the law in Gal 3:19 (cf. Col 2:18; 2 Thess 1:7; 1 Tim 3:16, 5:21).100 98

Ibid., 2:811–13; Furnish, II Corinthians, 549–50. See Loren T. Stuckenbruck, “Why Should Women Cover Their Heads Because of Angels?” (1 Corinthians 11:10)” S-CJ 4 (2001): 205–234; also Cecilia Wassen, “‘Because of the Angels’: Reading 1 Cor. 11:2–16 in Light of the Angelology in the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in The Dead Sea Scrolls in Context: Integrating the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Study of Ancient Texts, Languages, and Cultures, eds. Armin Lange, Emanuel Tov, and Matthias Weigold with Bennie H. Reynolds III (Leiden: Brill, 2011), 2:735–754. Craig S. Keener (The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament [Downers Grove: Intervarsity, 1993]) helpfully summarizes the proposals for the term ἄγγελος in this verse in the following way: “(1) the angels who (according to ancient Jewish interpretations of Gen 6:1–3) lusted after women and so fell; (2) the angels present in divine worship, who would be offended by a breach of propriety or affront to the husbands (cf. the Dead Sea Scrolls); and (3) the angels who rule the nations but who will ultimately be subordinate to all believers, including these women (6:3; i.e., as a future ruler a Christian woman or man should exercise wise choices in the present, even regarding apparel)” (476). 100 One occurrence could possibly be a reference to a human messenger. In Galatians 4:14, Paul reminds his audience of their former treatment of him. He writes that they received him as an ἄγγελος θεοῦ. One could read this phrase as the Galatians formerly honoring Paul as a human messenger sent from God. Now, however, they no longer behave in this manner 99

152

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

Furthermore, Paul does not tend to refer to human opponents of his ministry and the gospel as ἄγγελοι. In 2 Corinthians 11:13–15 he calls his opponents false apostles, deceitful workers, and servants of Satan respectively.101 In his list of hardships he employs the phrase false brothers (11:26) and he uses the term false brothers in Galatians 2:4. He also describes his opponents in Galatians 1:7 as “those confusing” the Galatians, whereas in 5:10 he characterizes them as the “ones troubling” the Galatians. Paul warns his Philippian audience to beware of the dogs, evil workers, and those who mutilate the flesh (Phil 3:2). Later in Philippians 3:18 he calls his opponents “enemies of the cross.” And, in Romans 16:17 he labels those who stir up trouble as “those who cause dissensions.” These examples illustrate that Paul often uses the term ἄγγελος to refer to suprahuman beings and not to denote his human opponents.102 Although σκόλοψ may have referred to human enemies of Israel in the LXX, Paul’s qualification of the term with the expression ἄγγελος Σατανᾶ indicates that he does speak of a rival but a non-human one. Lastly, the perspective that Paul’s ἄγγελος σατανᾶ denotes a human being fails “to account for the close connection that exists in Paul’s mind between the thorn and the visionary experience.”103 If the thorn comes as a result of the visions and revelations, as Paul indicates, what is the relationship between his opponents and these supernatural events? These observations demonstrate the problematic nature of viewing the thorn as human opponents or as some general opposition to Paul.

toward him. Conversely, one could also interpret this phrase as the Galatians treating Paul so well in the past that their treatment of him was fit for an angel (suprahuman entity) of God since they esteemed him so highly. This interpretation is most likely, especially when one considers the next phrase of this verse, ὡς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦν. The Galatians received Paul in such a manner that they treated him as if he were an angel of God, even the Son of God himself! If interpreted in this manner, then this reference also points to a supernatural being. 101 So also Furnish, II Corinthians, 549–550; Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:813. 102 Robert Jewett also observes that in his letters Paul’s use of ἄγγελος refers to “otherworldly messengers” (Romans: A Commentary, Hermeneia [Minneapolis: Fortress, 2006]), 551. 103 Morray-Jones, “Paradise Revisited,” 282. See also Price, “Punished in Paradise,” 35– 36.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

153

The second common view entails defining the thorn as some type of sickness or ailment.104 The proposed illnesses include malaria, epilepsy, migraines, depression, and eye trouble.105 Proponents argue that several reasons support this possibility. First, Paul’s language suggests physical pain, and the NT depicts Satan as an agent of physical pain (e.g. Lk 13:16; Mk 9:14–29). Second, the present tense verb κολαφίζω alludes to a recurring disability. One of the arguments against this proposal, however, is that from his letters Paul appears to be a strong man with great physical stamina. If he was afflicted with a debilitating illness, how could he have accomplished and endured so much? 106 Furnish argues that a chronic sickness does not have to be debilitating, only aggravating. 107 Due to the aforementioned concerns, some have posited that the illness was something that was severe when it occurred but allowed for periods of remission. For these interpreters, migraine headaches or periodic fever correspond to such a situation.108 Although this proposal is more compelling than the notion of human opponents, it is important to note an observation by Dean Brady. In his article “Paul and Religious Experience,” Brady observes that there is no instance in the Bible where illness is a thorn. 109 We can also add to

104 Scholars who follow this trajectory include William Baird, “Visions, Revelation, and Ministry: Reflections on 2 Cor 12:1–5 and Gal 1:11–17” JBL 104 (1985): 651–662; Becker, Letter Hermeneutics in 2 Corinthians; David J. A. Clines, “2 Corinthians” in NIBC, ed. F. F. Bruce (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979), 1389–1414; Furnish, II Corinthians; Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians; Peter Marshall, “A Metaphor of Social Shame: ΘΡΙΑΜΒΕΥΕΙΝ in 2 Cor. 2:14” NovT 25 (1983): 302–317; and Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians. 105 Tabor quips that with respect to Paul’s “‘thorn in the flesh’ the speculations are endless and at times sound like entries in a medical encyclopedia” (Things Unutterable, 36). 106 As Ernest Best states, “Whatever aggrieved [Paul] he clearly thinks of it as beginning at the time of his vision or as a consequence of it. It cannot then have been something to which he was always subject, for example, persecution or temptation. Equally it cannot have been a congenital physical illness or handicap, like a speech impediment, for that would always have been there. Some physical ailments also seem highly unlikely because no one who suffered from them could have accomplished Paul’s missionary work or endured the sufferings listed in 11:23–29” Second Corinthians, IBC (Atlanta: John Knox, 1987), 119. 107 Furnish, II Corinthians, 550. 108 Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:814–8 holds this view. 109 Dean Brady, “Paul and Religious Experience” in The Changing Face of Judaism, Christianity, and Other Greco-Roman Religions in Antiquity, eds. Ian H. Henderson and Gerbern S. Oegema, JSHRZ 2 (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 2006), 480. Thierry writes “Wenn man auf den engen Zusammenhang zwischen σκόλοψ und ἄγγελος achtet (das eine ist, wie man auch lesen mag, immer Apposition zu dem andern), drangt sich einem schon gleich die Vermutung auf, man durfe hier in keinem Fall an irgendein korperliches Leiden denken” (“Der Dorn im Fleische,” 304).

154

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

Brady’s comment that there is no instance in the Bible where sickness is called an angel of Satan.110 Both of these proposals, human opponents and illness, assume the metaphorical nature of Paul’s language. But what prevents a reading that takes Paul’s words at face value? Paul’s cosmology, which allows for heavenly journeys, certainly allows for his words to be taken literally. He has previously referred to Satan as an angel of light whose servants deceive others. He has also spoken of being engaged in divine warfare (10:3–6), and he has mentioned the existence of other spirits (11:4). Perhaps here Paul also speaks about a suprahuman entity that constantly torments and harasses him and attempts to impede his progress. Indeed, the discussion up to this point, which highlights Paul’s divine battle imagery, satanic influence in the Corinthian congregations, and ascent language, provides such a background for his words concerning the thorn in 12:7. Robert Price also advocates understanding the thorn in the flesh as a satanic entity. He asserts, “It makes sense to understand the thorn in the flesh, ‘an angel of satan, sent to buffet me,’ as quite literally a demon or malevolent angel, sent to punish Paul’s pride at the wonder of his experience.”111 James 110 Both Menoud (“The Thorn in the Flesh”) and Michael Barré (“Qumran and the ‘Weakness’ of Paul” CBQ 42 [1980]) argue that when looking at Paul’s peristasis catalogs in the Corinthian correspondence, none of them include a reference to sickness or disease. He does not, therefore, seem to incorporate health concerns as part of the adversities he suffers for the sake of the gospel. Menoud states, “Paul often mentions the physical hardships connected with the exercise of his apostleship but never the state of his health” (21). Similarly, Barré writes, “One should note that none of the trials-lists in Pauline literature contains any reference to sickness or physical disorder brought on by disease” (224; emphasis his). In the letter Paul positions his heavenly journey between two catalog lists, suggesting that he views his ascent as connected to the lists of hardships endured for the gospel. In light of how he constructs these catalog lists, he probably does not refer to illness acquired during this experience. It is important to mention, however, that in the gospels, evil spirits and unclean spirits are associated with illnesses. For example, in Luke 13:10–17 Luke recounts the story of a woman with a spirit of infirmity (πνεῦµα ἀσθενείας) which caused her to be bent over for 18 years. Jesus ascribes the source of this woman’s illness to Satan and Satan’s act of “binding” her (δέω). Here the language describing the woman’s predicament differs from Paul’s description of his situation. Paul declares that he will boast in weaknesses (11:30, 12:5) and be content in them (12:10), but he does not speak of a spirit of weakness. The context of his statements indicates that when he refers to weaknesses he means the trials he lists of which his ascent becomes a part (11:22–33; 12:10). In addition, although Satan is the origin of the woman’s infirmity and of Paul’s stake, the woman has a spirit of infirmity which binds her, whereas the apostle receives an angel of Satan that strikes or hits him. The different terminology suggests that the two accounts narrate different activities of an evil being. Therefore, although both of these entities come from Satan, they affect their human targets differently. 111 Price, “Punished in Paradise,” 37. Although this study follows Price in advocating a literal understanding of ἄγγελος Σατανᾶ, the reasons proposed for the appearance of this being differs from his. For a critique of Price see Furnish, II Corinthians, 550; Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:817.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

155

Tabor also notes the importance of taking Paul’s language literally, observing, “This focus on the phrase ‘thorn in the flesh’ throws one off. There is no indication here that Paul is writing about some physical ailment he suffered. Perhaps our best clue is what he plainly says, an angel of Satan (i.e. a demon) was allowed to afflict him…”112 Tabor’s statement highlights the importance of focusing on Paul’s language regarding this satanic entity. Paul’s contention that Satan has angels appears in other places in the New Testament: Matt 25:41 (“Then he will say to those at his left hand, ‘You that are accursed, depart from me into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels,’” NRSV) and in Rev 12:7, 9: (7) Καὶ ἐγένετο πόλεµος ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ Μιχαὴλ καὶ οἱ ἄγγελοι αὐτοῦ τοῦ πολεµῆσαι µετὰ τοῦ δράκοντος. καὶ ὁ δράκων ἐπολέµησεν καὶ οἱ ἄγγελοι αὐτοῦ, (9) καὶ ἐβλήθη ὁ δράκων ὁ µέγας, ὁ ὄφις ὁ ἀρχαῖος, ὁ καλούµενος ∆ιάβολος καὶ ὁ Σατανᾶς, ὁ πλανῶν τὴν οἰκουµένην ὅλην, ἐβλήθη εἰς τὴν γῆν, καὶ οἱ ἄγγελοι αὐτοῦ µετ’ αὐτοῦ ἐβλήθησαν. (7) And there was war in heaven; Michael and his angels fought against the dragon. And the dragon and his angels fought back. (9) and the great dragon was thrown down, the old snake, who is called the Devil and Satan, the one who deceives the whole world – he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.113

In addition to these texts, in the Life of Adam and Eve Satan tells Adam that he and his angels were cast out of Paradise because of Satan’s refusal to worship Adam: “And the Lord God was angry with me and sent me with my angels out from our glory; and because of you, we were expelled into this world from our dwellings and have been cast onto the earth.”114 Paul’s language utilizes common traditions concerning the existence of Satan’s angelic host, and his reference to a satanic figure in 12:7 corresponds to his earlier language in chapter 11. 115 When he uses the term angel earlier in this letter, he connects it to the figure of Satan: Satan has angels and can also transform himself into one. In

112

Tabor, Things Unutterable, 36 (emphasis his). At the same time, Tabor seems to understand the angel’s appearance as related to Paul’s pride, or rather a means of keeping Paul humble. This view differs greatly from the one proposed in this project. Although Wallace believes that the thorn in the flesh is some type of illness, he attributes this illness to “the work of a Satanic angel who attacks [Paul] as a consequence of his ascent. In Paul’s case, however, this attack occurs after the ascent and serves as an antidote for pride” (Snatched into Paradise, 167). 113 (Author’s translation). Note here the battle language and the context of the appearance of the “devil and his angels.” The depiction of Satan as a serpent and deceiver is similar to Paul’s description of Satan earlier in the letter (2 Cor 11:3, 13–15; cf. 4:4). 114 Life of Adam and Eve (Vita), OTP 2:262 (emphasis added). 115 In the Mart. Ascen. Isa. King Manasseh is said to have “abandoned the service of the Lord of his father, and he served Satan, and his angels, and his powers” (2:2, emphasis mine). OTP 2:143–176.

156

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

light of the analysis thus far, it is possible that Paul’s thorn in the flesh may be a satanic entity. 116 Similar expressions to Paul’s ἄγγελος σατανᾶ also exist in other Jewish literature. In the War Scroll 13.11 there is a reference to Belial as an angel of enmity ‫ מלאך משטמה‬. The writer states in 13.11–12 that all the spirits of Belial’s lot are angels of destruction and they walk in the laws of darkness ( ‫וכול רוחי‬ ‫)גורלו מלאכי חבל בחוקי חושך יתהלכו‬. The author describes Belial as an angel and at the same time acknowledges that Belial has angels. These statements are similar to Paul, who describes Satan as an angel of light in 11:14 and in 12:7 ascribes angels to Satan.117 As discussed in Chapter 2, in The Treatise of the Two Spirits 3.20 ff. the phrase ‫” מלאך חושך‬angel of darkness,” refers to Belial (1QS 2.19) and the formulation is noteworthy in light of the duties this angel of darkness performs. The angel of darkness rules over the sons of deceit (3.21), corrupts (3.21), and causes the sons of light to sin (3.22). The spirits of the angel of darkness make the sons of light fall (3.24). If the angel of darkness figure in 1QS is indeed Belial himself, then the activities of this figure parallel the activities of Satan, which Paul describes in the letter. Like the angel of darkness who wreaks havoc among the sons of light, Paul proclaims that Satan is at work among the Corinthian congregations. Satan, who through the serpent deceived Eve (11:3), is now at work through the false apostles to lead the Corinthians astray from the gospel. Paul fears the corruption (φθείρω) of the Corinthians’ minds (11:3). These texts, which include references to evil beings, suggest that Paul’s expression “angel of Satan” participates in traditions about an evil suprahuman figure with aides. Now that it has been demonstrated that the angel of Satan refers to a suprahuman being, the present analysis turns to consideration of other meanings of σκόλοψ. As already noted, σκόλοψ appears in the LXX as a reference to Israel’s enemies (Num 33:55; Ezek 28:24; cf. Hos 2:8; Sir 43:19). In classical Greek it

116 Price, “Punished in Paradise,” comes to this conclusion based on later Merkabah vision texts. 117 The phrases “angels of destruction” in CD 2.6 and “spirits of Mastema” (Jub 19:28) and “forces of Mastema” (Jub 49:2) appear in Jubilees. In Jub 19:28 Abraham blesses Jacob and prays “May the spirits of Mastema not rule over you and your descendants to remove you from following the Lord who is your God from now and forever.” The forces of Mastema precipitate the killing of the firstborn of Egypt during Passover in 49:2. Additionally, in Jub 10:8 Mastema, also called Satan in 10:11, is the chief of the evil spirits. These evil spirits, referred to as demons (10:2), are the spirits that derive from the fallen Watchers. The author of the Book of Watchers describes the activity of these beings in 15:11–12. All translations of Jubilees are from James C. VanderKam, ed., The Book of Jubilees: A Critical Text, CSCO 511 (Lovanii: E. Peeters, 1989), unless otherwise noted.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

157

could also refer to a stake, and this additional meaning has import for the current discussion.118 As David M. Park notes, classical writers depicted the use of stakes in two major ways.119 They were used in a military context, and they were used for torture.120 During battle, armies would cut wood from trees, construct long, tough stakes from the wood, and set them in the ground as barriers to slow down or impale the rival army. These barriers were defensive systems called palisades.121 The following excerpt from Homer’s Iliad demonstrates how these palisades operated as well as describes their formidable nature: Hector went through the throng and begged his comrades, urging them to cross the trench. But his swift-footed horses dared not, but loudly they neighed, standing on the sheer brink, for the trench frightened them, so wide was it, easy neither to overleap at a bound nor to drive across; for overhanging banks stood all about its circuit on both sides, and at the top it was set with sharp stakes (σκολόπεσσιν) that the sons of the Achaeans had planted, close together and great, a defense against the foe…. Then it was that Polydamas came up to bold Hector, and spoke, saying: “Hector, and you other leaders of the Trojans and allies, it is folly to seek to drive our swift horses across the trench; very hard it is to cross, for sharp stakes (σκόλοπες) are set in it, and close by them is the wall of the Achaeans. There it is not at all possible for charioteers to descend and fight; for the space is narrow, and then I think we shall suffer hurt.”122

Here σκόλοψ depicts defensive barriers used to keep approaching armies from succeeding in their advance. Related to this purpose of σκόλοψ is another military use. Σκόλοπες were used to trap and harm enemy combatants. Armies put stakes in pits and then covered the pits to make them look like the rest of the ground. Approaching troops unaware of the trap would then fall in and suffer injury.123 Cassius Dio provides an example of this scenario in his recitation of the clash between Caesar and Vercingetorix. He writes, The Romans had dug secret pits in the places which were passable for horses and had fixed stakes (σκόλοπας) in them, afterward making the whole resemble on the surface the surrounding ground; thus horse and man, falling into them absolutely without warning, came to grief.124

118

LSJ 735. Much of the following discussion is indebted to David M. Park, “Paul’s ΣΚΟΛΟΨ ΤΗ ΣΑΡΚΙ: Thorn or Stake? (2 Cor XII 7)” NovT 22 (1980): 179–183. 120 Ibid.,180. 121 Ibid. 122 Homer, Il. 12.49–64 (Murray, LCL). Cited also by Park, “Paul’s ΣΚΟΛΟΨ,” 180– 181. 123 Park, “Paul’s ΣΚΟΛΟΨ,” 181. 124 Cassius Dio, Historia Romana 40.40.5–6 (Cary, LCL). Cited also by Park, “Paul’s ΣΚΟΛΟΨ,” 181. 119

158

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

This quote indicates the use of σκόλοψ in a military context to injure troops and provides an additional picture of the use of this term in a martial setting. 125 Paul’s earlier employment of military terms suggests that he utilizes σκόλοψ in a martial context here as well. He has depicted himself as engaged in battle in the beginning of chapter 10 and, as seen above, continues to employ martial imagery in chapter 11. Here in 12:7 Satan gives Paul a stake in the form of an angel who acts as a barrier impeding Paul’s progress. Just as σκόλοπες were used to stop or slow down opposing armies, Paul received the satanic angel to stop or impede his ascent. In addition, the harmful nature of the σκόλοψ is evident in Paul’s use of the term. Just as stakes were used to set traps and injure troops, so the angel of Satan sought to stop Paul and also harm him. With the language of σκόλοψ the warfare terminology Paul utilizes in chapters 10 and 11 persists in 12:7 and demonstrates that the apostle views his encounter with the satanic angel as part of an intense military campaign. As mentioned above, stakes were also used as instruments of torture.126 The following excerpts illustrate this use. The first passage describes the torture implemented by the Thracian king Diegylis. He (Diegylis) inflicted terrible outrages and cruel tortures on the hostages left by any who absconded, among them children of very tender years and delicate constitution. Even these were torn limb from limb by every possible means, or had their heads, hands, and feet chopped off. Some of them were impaled on stakes (σκόλοψιν), others exposed on trees.127

The following passage denotes the use of σκόλοψ in both a sacrificial and torturous context. Here Diodorus describes the behavior of the Gauls: And in pursuance of their savage ways they manifest an outlandish impiety also with respect to their sacrifices; for their criminals they keep prisoner for five years and then impale (ἀνασκολοπίζουσι) in honour of the gods, dedicating them together with many other offerings of first-fruits and constructing pyres of great size.128

These two selections reveal that the term σκόλοψ signifies torment and torture, and this connotation of extreme pain is also behind Paul’s use of σκόλοψ, especially since he describes the angel as beating or striking him. The discussion up to this point highlights the nuances of σκόλοψ for Paul’s ascent. The apostle uses the term to denote a stake, the ἄγγελος σατανᾶ, strategically implemented by Satan to impede his ascent. Its military connotation continues the apostle’s 125

For the singular form of σκόλοψ used in a martial context for constructing barriers and pits as part of military strategy see Anonyma Tactica Byzantina, βʹ. 17–27, De re militari. This text and two other important military works have been translated by George T. Dennis, Three Byzantine Military Treatises. Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae 25. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks, 1985. 126 Park, “Paul’s ΣΚΟΛΟΨ,” 181. 127 Diodorus Siculus, Bibliotheca Historica 33.15.1 (Oldfather, LCL). Cited by Park, “Paul’s ΣΚΟΛΟΨ,” 181. 128 Ibid., 5.32.6 (Walton, LCL). Cited by Park, “Paul’s ΣΚΟΛΟΨ,” 180.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

159

depiction of himself as involved in an existing cosmic contest around the knowledge of God and the term further underscores the severity and painful attack by the angel of Satan. Paul’s employment of the expression conveys the complex dynamic dimensions of his harrowing experience. The idea that suprahuman entities fight or strike human beings is found in the oldest extant heavenly ascent literature, the Book of Watchers, which is also the earliest extant account of the origin of evil spirits in Judaism.129 The author of this work takes Genesis 6:1–4 as the starting point for the existence of evil spirits. This Genesis text is ambiguous enough for the author of the Book of Watchers to superimpose negative traditions upon it. 130 Indeed, the author views the mating of the angels with the women as a sin with cosmic consequences, and he depicts the offspring of the union, the giants, as evil. After the flood destroys the giants’ physical bodies, their spirits live on in the form of evil spirits. In 15:11 these evil spirits engage in physical attack against human beings. They torment humanity and cause havoc upon the earth. In describing the situation, the author writes in God’s speech to Enoch, 9 Πνεύµατα πονηρὰ ἐξῆλθον ἀπὸ τοῦ σώµατος αὐτῶν, διότι ἀπὸ τῶν ἀνωτέρον ἐγένοντο, καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἁγίων ἐγρηγόρων ἡ ἀρχὴ τῆς κτίσεως αὐτῶν καὶ ἀρχὴ θεµελίου·πνεύµατα πονηρὰ κληθήσεται. 10 πνεύµατα οὐρανοῦ, ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ ἡ κατοίκησις αὐτῶν ἔσται καὶ τὰ πνεύµατα ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς τὰ γεννηθέντα, ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἡ κατοίκησις αὐτῶν ἔσται. 11 Καὶ τὰ πνεύµατα τῶν γιγάντων νεφέλας ἀδικοῦντα, ἀφανίζοντα καὶ ἐνπίπτοντα καὶ συνπαλαίοντα καὶ συνρίπτοντα ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, πνεύµατα σκληρὰ γιγάντων, καὶ δρόµους ποιοῦντα καὶ µηδὲν ἐσθίοντα, ἀλλ’ ἀσιτοῦντα καὶ διψῶντα καὶ προσκόπτοντα πνεύµατα. 12 καὶ ἐξαναστήσει ταῦτα εἰς τοὺς υἱοὺς τῶν ἀνθρώπων καὶ τῶν γυναικῶν, ὅτι ἐξεληλύθασιν ἀπ’ αὐτῶν. (9) Evil spirits departed from their body, for they came from above, and from the holy watchers was the beginning of their creation and the beginning of their foundation; they will be called evil spirits. (10) Spirits of heaven, their dwelling place will be in heaven, and spirits which were produced on earth, their dwelling place will be on earth. (11) And the spirits of the giants are unjust [clouds],131destroying, attacking, wrestling, and hurling upon the earth. The spirits of the giants are cruel, constantly running around, eating nothing. But although

129 John J. Collins (“Genre, Ideology and Social Movements in Jewish Apocalypticism,” in Mysteries and Revelations: Apocalyptic Studies Since the Uppsala Colloquium, eds. John J. Collins and James H. Charlesworth, JSPSup [Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1991]) observes that the discovery of Enochic fragments changed the discussion around the origins of apocalypticism. He writes that because of the discovery “it was now apparent that 1 Enoch rather than Daniel contained the earliest full-blown apocalypses…” (25). 130 Loren T. Stuckenbruck, “The Origins of Evil in Jewish Apocalyptic Tradition: The Interpretation of Genesis 6:1–4 in the Second and Third Centuries B.C.E.,” in The Fall of the Angels, eds. Christoph Auffarth and Loren T. Stuckenbruck (Leiden: Brill, 2004), 87– 118. 131 Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch 1: A Commentary, notes that νεφέλας is probably a corruption (268).

160

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

they are without appetite, they are thirsty, striking spirits. (12) And these spirits will rise up against the sons of men and women, because they came out from them.132

This depiction of evil spirits, the spirits of the giants, involves violence in the form of attacking, wrestling, and striking men and women. 133Along with providing an account of the continuing presence of evil, the Book of Watchers provides space for conjecture as to why the spirits of giants assault humans. The spirits’ oppression of humanity could mean that the spirits want to reoccupy flesh.134 Archie Wright suggests that the unlawful origin of the giants (divine angels mating with human women) precipitates the violent nature of the giants’ spirits. He writes, “It seems the spirits of the giants were not able to exist within a physical body without bringing about violent behaviour because they are illegitimate and not properly constituted.”135 For Wright, then, the origin of these beings contributes to their brutal activities. Wright’s view differs somewhat from Loren Stuckenbruck’s, who argues that the evil spirits are violent because they are jealous that humans have escaped the flood with their bodies intact while they did not. 136 At any rate, the Book of Watchers lays the foundation for future traditions, such as those found in the New Testament, that depict evil spirits attacking and possessing humans.137 Paul takes part in such cultural discourse in the way he characterizes the violent activity of this particular angel of Satan. There are both differences and similarities between this Enochic text and Paul’s narrative. Evil spirits do not attack humans because they experience visions and revelations as in Paul’s case. Instead, they attack humans because they partly descend from them. This loathing for human beings may arise from 132

1 Enoch 15:9–12 (author’s translation and emphasis). As Loren T. Stuckenbruck notes, “The Giants exist in a radically altered form as evil spirits. I Enoch 15 does not talk about how this shift happens. Yet, they exist able to afflict humans (15:12).” “Giant Mythology and Demonology: From the Ancient Near East to the Dead Sea Scrolls” in Die Dämonen: Die Dämonologie der israelitisch-jüdischen und frühchristlichen Literatur im Kontext ihrer Umwelt, eds. Armin Lange, Hermann Lichtenberger and K. F. Diethard Römheld (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 2003), 336. 134 Archie T. Wright, The Origin of Evil Spirits: The Reception of Genesis 6.1–4 in Early Jewish Literature, WUNT 2/198 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005), 157n70. 135 Ibid., 164. Wright also states, “We have two very distinct created beings present in BW [Book of Watchers]. The Watchers, who are only spirit, have mated with humans who are spirit, soul, and flesh. The resulting hybrid has, according to the story, only spirit and flesh. The spirit of the giant is a corrupted spirit that has evolved from the angels” (164). 136 Loren T. Stuckenbruck, “The Origins of Evil,” 102–103 and “Demonic Beings and the Dead Sea Scrolls,” 123–124. 137 Loren T. Stuckenbruck, “Jesus’ Apocalyptic Worldview and His Exorcistic Ministry,” in The Pseudepigrapha and Christian Origins: Essays from the Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas, eds. Gerbern S. Oegema and James H. Charlesworth (New York: T&T Clark, 2008); Wright, Origin of Evil Spirits, 164. 133

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

161

anger or jealousy or both. Another difference is that the author describes these beings as evil spirits, not angels of Satan. Nonetheless, it is important to note that the violence in Paul’s case and in the Book of Watchers ultimately results from an encounter between the divine and the human realm. In the Book of Watchers it is an unauthorized encounter where evil spirits originate from a crossing of boundaries – angels have intercourse with human women who bring forth giant offspring. The actions of the Watchers result in the creation of “unauthorized new beings,” with God having no role in their creation.138 The subsequent violent behavior and attack by the spirits of these offspring take place due to the crossing of boundaries between heaven and earth. In a similar vein, Paul’s angel of Satan comes as a result of the apostle’s encounter with the divine sphere, which is also a crossing of boundaries. Paul, a human being, ascends to the third heaven and becomes privy to information that is not lawful for a human being to speak (12:4). In both cases movement between heaven and earth leads to dangerous outcomes. 139 Both accounts showcase human vulnerability to evil forces, for in the Book of Watchers and in Paul’s narrative suprahuman entities attack human beings. 140 The interpenetration of the cosmological and anthropological realms takes various turns and may bring about dire consequences. As Tabor observes, “Dealing with the heavenly world can be … dangerous.”141 Paul’s account and the Enochic passage illustrate Tabor’s observation. In a section of the Noahic fragments (65:1–8) of the Book of Parables (I Enoch 37–71), another reference to the violence of evil spirits appears. Knowing that destruction is about to occur, Noah travels to the ends of the earth to seek advice from his great grandfather Enoch, who has been translated to heaven. Enoch tells him that judgment is sure and will happen “against the inhabitants of the earth, that their end is accomplished, for they have learned

138

The phrase “unauthorized new beings” comes from Wright, Origin of Evil Spirits, 153. Stuckenbruck calls the giants “cosmological misfits without a proper place” (“Jesus’ Apocalyptic Worldview,” 81). 139 Nickelsburg notes that in 1 Enoch there is an “absolute distinction between divine beings and humans” (1 Enoch 1: A Commentary, 40). This is certainly true for 1 Enoch and for Paul as well. Nickelsburg also observes that the “sin of the watchers consisted precisely in their violation of the absolute distinction” (40). In “The Apocalyptic Construction of Reality in 1 Enoch” in Mysteries and Revelations: Apocalyptic Studies Since the Uppsala Colloquium, eds. John Collins and James Charlesworth, JSPSup 9 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1991) Nickelsburg states aptly that the consequences of the watchers’ actions in crossing this human/divine divide could be characterized as a “‘demonic’ victimization of humanity” (59). 140 Nickelsburg states that in this work “sin and evil are functions of a spirit realm that is at war with humanity” (1 Enoch 1: A Commentary, 41). 141 Tabor, Things Unutterable, 121. See also Maier’s discussion, “Das Gefährdungsmotiv bei der Himmelsreise,” regarding the danger of the numinous.

162

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

all the secrets of the angels, and all the violence of the satans…”142 Here again the idea that satans or evil spirits are violent appears. Although satan here is not depicted with a proper name as in 2 Corinthians 12:7, this passage still points to the reality of evil forces who wreak havoc upon humanity. Interpreting the angel of Satan in 12:7 as an entity that strikes Paul resonates with traditions in Jewish literature. That Paul takes such traditions and incorporates them into his ascent account is illuminating, for it demonstrates that Paul takes part in a view of the world where evil spirits affect human beings and sometimes attack them. By framing the angel’s blows with military terminology, Paul indicates that the angel’s actions are part of a cosmic struggle and so the susceptibility of humans to evil forces remains a primary focus for the apostle. Ascents to heaven do not stop satanic attack. Evil entities assault humans, even apostles. Moreover, Paul’s language in v.7 implies that he has been drawn reluctantly into a contest. The passive of δίδωµι illustrates that this entity was given to him and was not something he sought. For many interpreters δίδωµι is a divine passive. Νo explicitly expressed agent appears, and the thorn is thought to provide a benefit for Paul: it keeps him humble. Yet the idea that this thorn in the flesh has a beneficial purpose for Paul can be called into question. Paul explicitly states that the purpose of the thorn in the second ἵνα clause of 12:7 is to strike, beat, or harm him. The first and last ἵνα clauses of 12:7 give the intended result of the angel’s actions: it strikes him, so that he may not be lifted up. Due to the angel’s intense action against him, Paul prays to God that this angel will leave. From Paul’s description of the thorn and from his petition to God, Martin observes that “the thorn was inherently evil. Nowhere does Paul infer that this thorn was good. It was used to buffet Paul and caused him great consternation and pain.”143 While one can agree with Martin that the thorn was evil, there is reason for pause with the next comment he makes about the thorn. He writes, “Second, and more important, the thorn served a good purpose as a gift from God. The importance of the passive verb ἐδόθη, ‘was given,’ can hardly be exaggerated. God is the unseen agent behind the bitter experience.”144 Similar observations appear in Harris’s commentary. He writes: Here, then, we are confronted with a paradox. One and the same σκόλοψ was simultaneously given by God and used by Satan; a δῶρον θεοῦ is also an ἄγγελος Σατανᾶ. It is not that God is here working through Satan, or that there is dual agency, divine and demonic, but that Satan is active at the same time as God and by his permission. As Paul experienced his σκόλοψ, he discovered it to be both a gift from God and a tool of Satan – in the first case,

142

Nickelsburg and VanderKam, 1 Enoch (65:6). Martin, 2 Corinthians, 416. 144 Ibid. 143

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

163

because it deflated pride (ἵνα µὴ ὑπεραίρωµαι); in the second case, because it inflicted suffering (ἵνα µε κολαφίζῃ). The deflation of pride is God’s distinctive work … while the infliction of suffering is Satan’s distinctive work.145

From this quote two important observations arise regarding the σκόλοψ. First, it was given by God to Paul. Second, it operates as both a gift from God and a tool of Satan. Although Harris highlights the dual purpose of the thorn, it deflates pride (gift from God) and it inflicts suffering (tool of Satan), this dual purpose does not negate his underlying claim that God gives the thorn to Paul. Harris’s attempt to parse out God’s and Satan’s roles in this event and to depict Satan as working simultaneously with God underscores the challenging nature of this verse and the difficulty of viewing the σκόλοψ as both a gift and as evil. In her commentary Thrall observes, [Paul] has come to see [the thorn] as something bestowed on him by God, and yet at the same time it is inflicted by the agency of Satan.… It remains somewhat strange, even when we take into consideration the notion in Job that the Lord allows Satan to test the integrity of the righteous (Job 1.8–12; 2.3–6): this tale gives the impression that the initiative largely rests with Satan, whereas in the present passage the initiative clearly comes from God.146

Indeed, Paul’s language here is not easy to understand. All of these interpreters wrestle with the complexity of Paul’s language and with what seems to be, from the apostle’s words, a dualistic depiction – the troubling, contradictory nature of seeing the thorn as simultaneously evil and as a gift. On the one hand, the thorn is inherently evil and causes Paul pain. Yet on the other hand, God grants Paul this “gift” for two reasons: to keep him from being conceited and to allow God’s power to rest upon him. Thrall’s comments raise an important issue that deeply affects the interpretation of this passage. In highlighting a connection between Job and this pericope, she illuminates how the contradictory perspective of God as the giver of the “gift” of the painful thorn has gained almost universal acceptance. Her reference to Job emphasizes the dominant tendency to read this passage through a Joban framework. Paul Barnett typifies this view, writing, “The juxtaposition of ‘was given [by God]’ and ‘messenger of Satan’ recalls the early chapters of Job, where God allows Satan to afflict Job’s household (Job 1:12), then his person (Job 2:6–7).”147 But what in the passage constrains one to read Paul’s experience through a Joban lens?

145

Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 856. Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:808. Emphasis mine. 147 Barnett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 570. Hans Josef Klauck (2. Korintherbrief [Würzburg: Echter, 1988]) holds a similar view writing, “Der doppelte Ursprung des Leidens, seine göttliche und satanische Herleitung, mag widersprüchlich erscheinen. Wir brauchen aber nur ins Ijobbuch zu blikken. Dort gewährt Gott dem Satan freie Hand, und der schlägt daraufhin Ijob mit schwerer Krankheit” (94); See also Garland, 146

164

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

In light of the foregoing analysis which highlights Paul’s use of military terminology in chapters 10–11 and his continued use of that terminology with σκόλοψ in 12:7 to describe the thorn, Paul’s encounter with the angel of Satan is quite different than Job’s experience. Paul depicts this suprahuman encounter as a battle and not as something given to him by God. Moreover, the circumstances of Paul and Job are different, as Thrall in the quote above recognizes. By saying that God gives this thorn to Paul, one attributes to God a more active role in bestowing evil and not just a permissive role as seen in Job. Therefore, the question remains, is this dominant interpretation the only way to understand this passage, especially in light of the discussion of chapters 10 and 11? With the inadequacies of the current interpretive models exposed, the subsequent analysis will point to another possible reading. First, the passive voice of δίδωµι in v. 7 does not necessarily imply God as the agent, even though this is a common assumption. Martin mentions the possibility that this is not a divine passive but then summarily dismisses this option, stating that “it is doubtful that Satan is the giver, even if σκόλοψ τῇ σαρκί is the grammatical subject of ἐδόθη.”148 Yet as demonstrated above, Paul in chapters 10–11 depicts a cosmic conflict between God and Satan, and he now presents himself as one being battered by Satan, so it seems unlikely that he would depict this angel of Satan as a gift from God in the midst of portrayal of divine warfare. What seems more likely is that he continues the depiction of Satan as one who opposes himself, believers, and therefore God. Thus, the angel of Satan comes from Satan and opposes Paul’s ascent.149 It is out of this 2 Corinthians, 522–3 and Erich Gräßer, Der Zweite Brief an die Korinther: Kapitel 8,1– 13,13, ÖTBK 8/2 (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 2005), 198. 148 Martin, 2 Corinthians, 412. 149 Price, “Punished in Paradise,” and Morray-Jones, “Paradise Revisited” also argue for viewing Paul’s ascent as an instance of opposition but they posit Hekhalot and Rabbinic literature as the background for Paul’s heavenly rapture. Cf. Hans Bietenhard, Die himmlische Welt im Urchristentum und Spätjudentum, WUNT 2 (Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1951); Wilhelm Bousset, “Die Himmelsreise der Seele,” AR 4 (1901): 136–169, 229–273. Most recently, Gooder, Only the Third Heaven?, maintains that Paul’s ascent elicits opposition and that the journey fails due to the angel of Satan. This study differs from these interpreters in several important areas. First, the present project connects Paul’s ascent to the martial imagery that appears throughout chapters 10–13 (see discussion in Chapter 2). Second, it does not advocate looking only at Hekhalot and Rabbinic sources to ascertain the background for viewing Paul’s rapture as an example of opposition. Instead, Paul’s depiction of his encounter coheres with the broader motif of opposition to knowledge of God which, as will be seen, occurs in a variety of texts. These texts illustrate obstruction to divine insight in different ways, and the apostle knows traditions which portray obstacles to knowledge of God and echoes these traditions in his account. Third, as already discussed in detail above, this study does not argue, as do so many other interpreters, that Paul’s supernatural experience is primarily about a defense of his apostleship vis á vis the false apostles. Significantly, the ascent demonstrates the existence of cosmic conflict surrounding human insight into the

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

165

framework of battle and warfare that Paul asks God for deliverance from the enemy. Furthermore, up to this point Paul attempts to paint a portrait for his Corinthian hearers/readers, a portrait which consists of drawing extreme dividing lines between God and Satan. The appearance of these dividing lines emerges early in his previous correspondence to the Corinthians in which he provides a disturbing picture of Satan. 3.2.3.1 Paul’s Depiction of Satan The apostle often mentions a satanic figure in his letters to the Corinthians. In 2 Corinthians alone he explicitly uses the term Satan three times (2:11; 11:14; 12:7), and in two other instances he uses other appellations to refer to Satan, “the god of this age” (4:4) and “Beliar” (6:15). He makes another allusion to Satan with his reference to the serpent figure in 11:3. As Susan Garrett notes, although Paul does not make this connection explicit, he probably assumes its existence.150 In 1 Corinthians Paul discusses the figure of Satan in 5:5 and 7:5, and an examination of such language regarding Satan delineates the portrait that Paul paints for his Corinthian audience concerning this being. First, the investigation explores references to Satan in 2 Corinthians and then moves briefly to the apostle’s statements about Satan in 1 Corinthians. In 2 Corinthians 2:11 Paul’s comment concerning Satan occurs at the end of a discussion regarding forgiveness of an offender who, in some way, offended Paul and the Corinthians. 151 Paul urges the Corinthians to forgive the person and assures them that he forgives the person as well. Although one cannot be sure about the circumstances that precipitate the apostle’s comments, his insertion of Satan at this point is quite interesting. He informs the Corinthians that forgiveness of the offender and reception of the offender are important so that this person may not be overcome with excessive sorrow. He then implicitly

divine realm. And fourth, this present analysis connects Paul’s experience of satanic obstruction with the Corinthian congregation which is encountering its own form of satanic opposition in the presence of the false apostles. 150 Susan R. Garrett, “The God of This World and the Affliction of Paul,” in Greeks, Romans, and Christians: Essays in Honor of Abraham J. Malherbe, eds. David L. Balch, Everett Ferguson, and Wayne Meeks (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 106. 151 Identifying the situation and the offender behind Paul’s words is quite difficult due to the lack of information about the circumstances. Earlier interpreters such as Chrysostom and Ambrosiaster assume that the offender is the man from 1 Cor 5 who is sleeping with his stepmother. Many modern scholars, however, disagree with this view. These interpreters include William Baird, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Knox Preaching Guides, ed. John H. Hayes (Atlanta: John Knox, 1980), 77; Rudolf Bultmann, The Second Letter to the Corinthians, ed. Erich Dinkler, trans. Roy A. Harrisville (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1976), 48; Furnish, II Corinthians, 163–166; Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 225–227; Martin, 2 Corinthians, 37–38.

166

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

links the act of unforgiveness and not receiving the person back into the community with allowing Satan an opportunity to take advantage of the situation and to employ some type of scheme. Unfortunately, Paul does not explicitly state what he means by this claim, but several elements come to the fore in his language. First, his words suggest the vulnerability of believers to Satan for Satan has the ability to take advantage of or outsmart believers (πλεονεκτέω). Although the Corinthians may be ἅγιοι and have God as their father (1:1–2), they are still susceptible to satanic power. Second, and relatedly, Paul’s language emphasizes that Satan has designs, schemes, or traps for believers, for here Satan seeks to entrap believers and thus attempts to use various opportunities, such as unforgiveness and separation from the community, to do so. Nonetheless, Paul declares that “we are not without knowledge of his designs.”152 Here Paul asserts that knowledge about Satan’s schemes is possible for believers and although they are susceptible to satanic power, they can also attain knowledge about satanic snares. The apostle does not discuss at this point how one obtains such insight about Satan’s strategies, but he does highlight important information about Satan in 2:11, which he continues to expound upon in later verses. In 11:14 Paul continues to depict Satan as deceptive, as one who disguises himself as an angel of light. He also underscores the relationship between Satan and the false apostles. Just as Satan disguises himself, his emissaries do the same since servants take on the characteristics of the one they serve. His language in 11:14 corresponds to and extends his ideas in 2:11. The depiction of human susceptibility to satanic power expands and moves to a different level in 11:13–15, for in these verses Satan employs human beings for his work. Paul paints the false apostles as not only susceptible to satanic power but also as people who have taken on the very characteristics of this satanic power. They become partakers and participants in Satan’s ploy of deceiving believers. Susceptibility has become assimilation.153 In 12:7 Paul’s hearers discover that Satan not only disguises himself as an angel but also possesses angels.154 Paul’s belief that Satan commands angels 152 Plummer notes that Paul probably intends the phrase οὐ γὰρ τὰ νοήµατα ἀγνοοῦµεν as a play upon words (Commentary on the Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 63). Hence, he offers the apt translation “for we are not unwitting of his wiles” (63). 153 Paul’s depiction of the false apostles as taking on the characteristics of the one they serve by disguising themselves as Satan disguises himself continues in 11:20. The false apostles behave like Satan in that they enslave, devour, and take advantage of the Corinthians. This picture of his opponents provides a fitting contrast to Paul, who also takes on the characteristics of the one he serves. As a διάκονος of Christ, he is humble, weak, and empowered by God (10:3–6; 12:9–10; 13:4). 154 See my earlier discussion in 3.2.3 in which I explain my rationale for interpreting Paul’s expression “angel of Satan” to refer to a suprahuman being and not a human messenger.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

167

coheres with other early beliefs (Matt 25:41; Rev 12:7, 9). His language here also expands Satan’s forces from the human realm – Satan’s employment of human emissaries – to the cosmic realm. Satan utilizes both human and suprahuman agents to carry out his plans. In 12:7 Satan’s angel afflicts Paul by beating him. We have talked briefly about this event above, and we will discuss it in more detail shortly. For now, it is enough to note that the apostle’s words illustrate his vulnerability to satanic power and Satan’s ability to inflict harm upon human beings. Such a depiction corresponds with Paul’s earlier statements about the relationship between human beings and Satan (2:11; 11:3). Up to this point, the focus has been on Paul’s explicit use of the name Satan. The discussion now turns to the two other instances in 2 Corinthians in which Paul refers to Satan without using the term Σατανᾶς. In 4:4 Paul employs the phrase ὁ θεὸς τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου, “the god of this age,” and declares that “the god of this age” blinds unbelievers. Some interpreters believe that Paul refers to God with this terminology.155 They argue he would not refer to Satan as a god, and in other instances the apostle depicts God as one who blinds. Yet Paul’s qualifier in 4:4, τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου, “of this age,” distinguishes this reference from other places where he attributes hardening to God. 156 The apostle uses the phrase “of this age” or “of this world” to refer to the present age. In Galatians 1:4 Paul writes that this present age is evil (τοῦ αἰῶνος τοῦ ἐνεστῶτος πονηροῦ) and that God in Christ has come to deliver from the present evil age. The present time is one from which believers need rescue, and this implies, therefore, that the power that governs this age is a malevolent force. Paul’s language suggests the existence of two different ages – the present evil one and a future age where evil is nonexistent. 157 In addition, Paul uses “of this age” and “of the/this world,” interchangeably. For example, in 1 Corinthians 1:20 Paul asks “Where is the skillful debater of this age (τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου)?” And then in the next clause, he asks, “Does not God make the wisdom of the world foolish (τοῦ κόσµου)?” The juxtaposition of the questions with phrases “of this age” and “of the world” at the end of each clause indicates that Paul uses these expressions synonymously. He presents 155 For the view that Paul refers here to God see Frances M. Young and David F. Ford, Meaning and Truth in Second Corinthians (Eugene: Wipf & Stock, 1987), 115–118. 156 In Rom 11:7 and 11:25, Israel is “hardened” (πωρόω). Paul does not use τυφλόω although in the KJV it is translated as blinded. He does write in Rom 11:8 that God gave Israel eyes that would not see. Again in 2 Cor 3:14 Paul discusses Israel’s hardening, this time in reference to their minds. Israel’s hardened minds, however, are only temporary and serve a purpose, the salvation of the Gentiles. And ultimately, the apostle states in Rom 11:26 that all Israel will be saved. In 2 Cor 4:4, Paul extends the notion of affected minds to all unbelievers, which includes Jews and Gentiles. Such language indicates the universal scope of humanity’s situation. 157 In Chapter 2 we discussed this notion of a present age of evil and a future age of deliverance in the War Scroll and in The Treatise of the Two Spirits.

168

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

the wisdom of this world as different from godly wisdom, and in 1 Corinthians 3:18 he admonishes anyone who thinks he is wise in “this age” (ἐν τῷ αἰῶνι τούτῳ) to become a fool. In the next verse, Paul reiterates that the wisdom “of this world” (τοῦ κόσµου τούτου) is foolishness with God. Once again he uses “this age” and “this world” as synonyms, contrasting worldly and godly insight, signifying opposition between what the world considers wisdom and what God considers wisdom. The phrases “wisdom of this age” (σοφίαν τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου) and “rulers of this age” (τῶν ἀρχόντων τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου) appear in 1 Corinthians 2:6, 8. For Paul there is a wisdom that belongs to this age and there are rulers that belong to this age as well. It is possible that here Paul refers to both human authorities and suprahuman rulers.158 Tracing his use of ἄρχων at this point is helpful to the discussion. As Walter Wink observes, by the time Paul writes this letter, none of the leaders responsible for Jesus’s death remains in office. Humans inevitably die, even those leaders who crucified Jesus. Thus, for Paul to make this statement about humans passing away is obvious. Yet if Paul refers to ἄρχοντες whom his hearers consider as immortal, then he makes a profound declaration. Even those powers deemed immortal belong to the current age which is passing away.159 George H. C. MacGregor asserts that Paul’s language in 1 Corinthians 2:7–8 highlights the interconnectedness of both the human and suprahuman. He writes, To begin with it is the “principalities and powers” themselves who are ultimately responsible for the crucifixion. When Paul writes that had they known “the mysterious wisdom of God” 158 Those scholars who believe that Paul refers to demonic forces in 1 Cor 2:6, 8 include Baird, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, 14, and Martin Dibelius, Die Geisterwelt im Glauben des Paulus (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1909) who sums the view up well, “Dem dritten Satz zulieb hat man bei den ἄρχοντες τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου an die irdischen Machthaber zur Zeit Jesu, also an den Hohen Rat, Herodes, Pilatus gedacht. Aber diese können schwerlich als Herren dieses Äons bezeichnet werden. Wir wissen, durch wessen Herrschaft die gegenwärtige Weltzeit nach des Paulus Meinung charakterisiert ist: die Engelmächte sind Herren über diese Welt, die στοιχεῖα, κύριοι sind die ἄρχοντες τοῦ αἰῶνος τούτου. Was hätte auch bei sterblichen Menschen die ausdrückliche Bestimmung καταργούµενοι für einen Sinn? Vielmehr gründet sich ja gerade darauf das Urteil des Paulus über den αἰὼν οὗτος, daß dieser mitsamt der ihn beherrschenden Geisterwelt ein καταργούµενος ist, daß der αἰὼν µέλλων bereits vor der Tür steht … [Es ist] sehr unwahrscheinlich, daß Paulus, der die treibenden Mächte der Heilsgeschichte immer im Geisterreich sucht, hier auf die menschlichen Urheber von Jesu Kreuzigung anspielen sollte” (89–90). Also Pierre Benoit, “Pauline Angelology and Demonology: Reflections on the Designations of the Heavenly Powers and on the Origin of Angelic Evil according to Paul,” RSB 3 (1983): 11–12; Garrett, “The God of This World and the Affliction of Paul,” 104; Ernst Käsemann, Perspectives on Paul (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971), 49; for a different view Keener, 1–2 Corinthians, 38. 159 Walter Wink, Naming the Powers: The Language of Power in the New Testament, vol. 1 of The Powers (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984), 42. Wink eventually concludes that Paul refers to both earthly and heavenly powers in this passage (45).

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

169

… “the rulers of this world” … “would not have crucified the Lord of glory” (1 Cor. ii. 7– 8), he is not exonerating from blame earthly authorities like Caiaphas, Pilate and Herod; but he is suggesting that behind them stand invisible powers, infinitely more dangerous, of whom the visible human “rulers” are the mere agents. By “rulers of this world” the Apostle appears to mean both the cosmic “principalities and powers” and also their actual human executives; and the very kernel of his doctrine of redemption is that by their tragic miscalculation the “rulers” become the instrument of their own destruction. For the sovereignty of Christ is such that even the hostility of the “principalities and powers” is compelled to subserve not their own ends, but God’s.160

For MacGregor, one does not need to choose between the suprahuman powers and the human rulers in these verses. Although he believes that powers act behind the scenes in Jesus’s death, in the final analysis both human and suprahuman are intricately linked and cannot be separated. In 1 Corinthians 15:24 Paul writes that every ruler and every authority and every power (πᾶσαν ἀρχὴν καὶ πᾶσαν ἐξουσίαν καὶ δύναµιν) will be destroyed when Christ hands over the kingdom to God the Father.161 Paul’s delineation of death as the last enemy to be destroyed in 15:26 suggests that here too we also have to do with suprahuman rulers.162 Death, the last enemy of humankind, will finally cease its subjection of humanity.163 One cannot rule out, however, that Paul has both human and suprahuman rulers in mind in 1 Corinthians 2 and 15 as indicated by his use of πᾶς. Paul pairs ἀρχαί with ἄγγελοι in Romans 8:38. As noted in the above discussion, Paul often uses ἄγγελοι to refer to suprahuman beings, and here, in Romans, Paul depicts angels as entities which may try to separate humans from God. Such a view corresponds with what has been demonstrated in 2 Corinthians 11:14, where Satan transforms himself into an angel in order to deceive. Paul’s pairing of ἀρχαί with ἄγγελοι in Romans 8:38 strongly suggests that here ἀρχαί for Paul refers to suprahuman rulers.164 This brief overview of Paul’s use 160 George H. C. MacGregor, “Principalities and Powers: The Cosmic Background of Paul’s Thought” NTS 1 (1954): 22–23. See also 24. However, view M. C. de Boer, The Defeat of Death: Apocalyptic Eschatology in 1 Corinthians 15 and Romans 5 (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1988), who writes, “The fact that ‘the rulers of this age’ are said to have crucified Christ (2.8) does not mean that Paul has human rulers in view. In the Gospels, too, the crucifixion of Jesus on the plane of history is portrayed as a cosmological conflict between God and Satan. The ‘real’ battle is not between God and human beings but between God and the suprahuman forces that exert their evil power over and in human beings” (230). 161 Wesley Carr argues for human rulers here. See Angels and Principalities: The Background, Meaning and Development of the Pauline Phrase hai archai kai hai exousiai (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981), 89–92. 162 So also Wink, Naming the Powers, 51. 163 For a different view Carr, Angels and Principalities, 118–120. 164 See also Carr, Angels and Principalities, 112–114; Jewett recognizes this possible interpretation for Romans 8:38, but believes Paul refers to political rulers (Romans, 552). Nonetheless, he concludes that “the fuzzy nature of the evidence and of the scholarly discussion precludes any certainty in this assessment” (552). However, Wink believes that since

170

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

of ἀρχαί indicates that when he utilizes this term he most likely refers to suprahuman agents. However, one cannot rule out that with this expression he signifies both human and suprahuman rulers who belong to this age. Along with wisdom and rulers that belong to this age, the apostle discusses unseemly conduct that belongs to “this world” (τοῦ κόσµου τούτου) in 1 Corinthians 5:10. Paul believes there is a way of living that corresponds to the ways of the present world and is in direct opposition to the way believers should live. And finally, in 7:31 at the end of a passage in which he urges the Corinthians to perceive the shortness of the time at hand, he proclaims that the “form of this world” (τὸ σχῆµα τοῦ κόσµου τούτου) is passing away.165 All of these instances demonstrate that Paul deems this age or this world as temporary, as evil, and as one which has its own wisdom and manner of life. This age and the rulers of it oppose God to such an extent that humans need God’s intervention to experience deliverance from it.166 This brief exploration of Paul’s usage of “this age” and “this world” illustrates that when Paul speaks of the “god of this age” in 2 Corinthians 4:4 he speaks about Satan who rules this age and works to deceive. The following remarks by Troels Engberg-Pedersen provide a fitting summary of the discussion so far. He writes, As the arch-opponent of God Satan is the god of the present evil aeon. Thus the present world as a whole – with all its human inhabitants, malevolent angels, and demons – is under his rule. Only in one place within that world is Satan’s power broken: where God’s pneuma dwells in believers and in the channel established by the pneuma ‘itself’ between them and God. And only in one place outside the present world is Satan’s power broken: in heaven, where God rules together with Christ, and from where Christ will finally come to vanquish Satan and free the present world from slavery to death and decay by transforming it into the state of freedom ‘of the glory of the children of God’. This exceedingly pessimistic picture of the present world (if ‘pessimistic’ is the proper word) is of course an ‘apocalyptic’ one. That does not imply, however, that it is not also cosmological. In fact, it is.167

Engberg-Pedersen’s words underscore the emphases of the previous analysis in which Paul is seen to understand the present world to lie under satanic rule

Paul speaks of human agents in vv. 31–37, here he speaks of “evil spiritual powers” (Naming the Powers, 49). Edward Adams argues that angels, principalities (ἄρχαι), and powers refer to hostile spiritual forces (Constructing the World: A Study in Paul’s Cosmological Language [Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000], 184). 165 In a similar vein, note the discussion in de Boer, “Paul and Apocalyptic Eschatology,” who asserts that Paul was familiar with some form of eschatological dualism (349). 166 This perspective makes sense in light of Paul’s language of “new creation” in 2 Cor 5:17. A new creation is needed because the old creation has fallen under the power of the present evil age and is now groaning and in travail awaiting its own rescue and deliverance (Rom 8:19–23). 167 Troels Engberg-Pedersen, Cosmology and Self in the Apostle Paul: The Material Spirit (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), 95–96.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

171

and Satan to be directly opposed to God. However, this apocalyptic and cosmological conception of the world does not disregard God’s sovereign power. God will eventually destroy Satan and his works. In 2 Corinthians 4:6 Paul depicts God as one who brings the light of the gospel to those in darkness. The apostle contrasts the actions of the god of this age, which result in blindness and darkness, with God, whose activity brings about light and knowledge. Such a contrast underscores the strong dichotomy between God and the god of this age. 168 The next implicit reference to Satan in 2 Corinthians occurs in 6:15 in the midst of a passage whose origins are disputed. Interpreters have debated for some time about the source of 6:14–7:1 since it interrupts the flow of 6:13–7:2 and contains vocabulary that does not appear anywhere else in the extant Pauline literature. Consequently, some interpreters view these verses as non-Pauline.169 The question then arises as to how this passage comes to be located here. Opinions tend to revolve around one of the five following options: This is 1) a fragment from the letter mentioned in 1 Cor. 5:9; 2) a Pauline passage in which Paul uses unusual and emotional language for rhetorical impact; 3) a non-Pauline excerpt that Paul inserts; 4) a non-Pauline passage inserted by a later editor; or 5) a passage that reflects the theology of his opponents. 170 No manuscripts 168 In John 12:31 and 16:11, the writer uses the phrase “ruler of this world” to refer to Satan. Thus, Paul’s description corresponds with the language of other early Christians. 169 Joachim Gnilka (“2 Cor 6:14–7:1 in the Light of the Qumran Texts and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,” in Paul and Qumran: Studies in New Testament Exegeis, ed. Jerome Murphy-O’Connor [Chicago: Priory, 1968]) avers “on account of the profusion of hapaxlegemona, and of the change in meaning of various words used by Paul in another sense, this passage cannot have originally been written by Paul. The contrasting pairs Christ-Belial, believer-unbeliever … compel us to assume that the author of this fragment was a Christian. But he has been considerably influenced by traditions which are active in Qumran and the Test. XII Patr., as is proved by a number of parallel concepts and ideas. Paul or someone else inserted the already existent fragment into 2 Cor” (60–61 italics his). Martin, 2 Corinthians: “We also cannot agree with those who see the vv as non-Pauline, and as put there in 2 Corinthians by accident or an interpolator other than Paul. It seems more probable that Paul borrowed a writing of Essene origin, placed the finishing touches on it, and added it to this letter because of a specific intention. That intention, we repeat, has to be seen as Paul’s continued appeal to his alienated children to believe his Gospel of reconciliation and thereby to break with the unbelieving world with which – however unwittingly – they have identified themselves. In our view, and against most interpreters, we see 6:14–7:1 as integral to Paul’s closing argument begun in chap. 5 and completed in 7:3ff. It is not a digression but a logical development” (195). Furnish observes that the passage remains “an enigma within 2 Cor, neither its origin nor its place in the context being entirely clear” (II Corinthians, 383). 170 This helpful summary comes from John T. Fitzgerald, introduction and footnotes of “The Second Letter of Paul to the Corinthians,” The HarperCollins Study Bible: Fully Revised and Updated: New Revised Standard Version, ed. Harold W. Attridge (New York: HarperCollins, 2006), 1964. See also the thorough discussion in Furnish, II Corinthians, 371–383.

172

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

survive without this passage. Therefore, it must have been added very early if a later editor added it. More than likely, Paul takes these verses from another source and uses them for his own purpose.171 Beginning in chapter 4 Paul outlines several antitheses: blindness/darkness vs. light (4:4, 6); death vs. life (4:10–12); inward man vs. outward man (4:16); seen/temporal vs. unseen/eternal (4:18); earthly house/temporary vs. house not made with hands/eternal (5:1); new vs. old (5:17); sin vs. righteousness (5:21). A few verses prior to 6:14, Paul characterizes the life of an apostle in antithetical terms: “by honor and dishonor, by evil report and good report, as deceivers and yet true, as unknown, and yet well-known, as dying and behold we live; as punished not killed, as sorrowful, yet always rejoicing, as poor yet making many rich, as having nothing and yet possessing all things” (6:8–10). Thus, although 6:14–7:1 contains vocabulary otherwise unknown in the Pauline corpus, this style of antithetical reasoning is present earlier in the letter. With this dualistic language, Paul admonishes the Corinthians to see their own lives as lives of contrast. The antitheses in these verses echo earlier antitheses and are as follows: believers vs. unbelievers (6:14, 15b); righteousness vs. unrighteousness (6:14); light vs. darkness (6:14); Christ vs. Beliar (6:15a); temple of God vs. temple of idols (6:16).172 Paul’s use of Beliar here is the only time he uses this term to refer to Satan. This nomenclature, however, appears in other literature of the 2nd temple period, such as in some of the Dead Sea Scrolls documents discussed above (cf. 1QS 2.19; War Scroll 13.11–12). The presence of this title along with the strong dualistic language of these verses echoes oppositional language found in other texts roughly contemporaneous with Paul. That Paul adopts such terminology here demonstrates his participation in this view of the world. As indicated in Paul’s other references to Satan in 2 Corinthians, here Beliar appears as an enemy to all that is good and in agreement with God.173 The opposition that characterizes the relationship of Christ and Beliar also characterizes the lives that follow each accordingly. Just as Christ has no partnership with Beliar, neither should those that follow him have partnership with those that follow Beliar. Those that adhere to Christ and those that 171 Gnilka believes a member of the Corinthian church inserted the fragment (“2 Cor 6:14–7:1,” 67). 172 Paul uses temple language in other places in the Corinthian literature. See 1 Cor. 3:16– 17; 5:1–13; 6:19. Paul’s perspective that the community of believers replaces the temple corresponds to views of Jews within other groups, such as the writers of some of the Qumran documents, who saw their community as a replacement of the temple. See CD 20:23; 1QS VIII:5 and the discussion by Karl P. Donfried, “Paul the Jew and the Dead Sea Scrolls,” in The Dead Sea Scrolls in Context: Integrating the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Study of Ancient Texts, Languages, and Cultures, eds. Armin Lange, Emanuel Tov, and Matthias Weigold in association with Bennie H. Reynolds III (Leiden: Brill, 2011), 2:726–728. 173 Martin, citing de Jonge, mentions the possibility that the contrast between Christ and Belial was not unknown among believers (2 Corinthians, 200).

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

173

adhere to Beliar lead lives in total opposition to each other. The apostle vehemently conveys a deep dichotomy between Christ and Beliar, light and darkness, righteousness and unrighteousness. 174 For him there is no in-between state. A brief examination of 1 Corinthians where Paul depicts Satan as a destroyer and as a tempter will round out the current discussion of Paul’s depiction of Satan. In 1 Corinthians 5 Paul admonishes the Corinthians to turn over the man in their congregation who has been sleeping with his stepmother to Satan for the destruction of the flesh. Although complete understanding of 5:5 eludes us, the most important element for present purposes is Paul’s depiction of Satan’s ability to destroy the flesh: Flesh lies within the realm of Satan’s power and influence. Satan also has the power to tempt believers as well, as illustrated in 1 Corinthians 7:5. There Paul warns married couples to be careful about the length of time they separate from each other, for too much time apart allows Satan the opportunity to tempt them. In his references to Satan in both 1 and 2 Corinthians, Paul paints a coherent portrait of this figure portraying him as one who plots against believers and blinds unbelievers. He also tempts, deceives, and masquerades as an angel of light. In addition, he directly opposes God and utilizes human and suprahuman agents for his anti-God efforts. Paul presents God and Satan as two powers, albeit unequal, in conflict with each other. This conflict invariably affects human beings, who find themselves susceptible to Satan’s schemes, deception, and power to blind. According to the apostle, believers can possess knowledge about Satan’s devices and can and should align themselves on the right side of the dichotomy – God’s side (6:14–7:1).175 Before leaving Paul’s depiction of Satan, one other oblique reference to a satanic entity deserves mention. In 2 Corinthians 11:4 Paul charges the Corinthians with receiving a different spirit. More than likely, the figure Satan is not 174

For example, we have seen references to Belial as well as dualistic language in Chapter 2 in 1QS and the War Scroll (e.g. 1QS 1.18, 24; 2.5, 19; 3.17–22; 4.23–24; War Scroll 1.1, 13.2, 4, 11; 4Q491 frgs. 8–10 ll. 6–7, frg. 15 ll.8–10; 4Q496 frg. 3 ll. 5–6). The Treatise of the Two Spirits, the section of 1QS examined in Chapter 2, does not contain the term Belial. Yet as noted in that chapter, some interpreters such as Frey, “Different Patterns,” believe that the title which does appear in the Treatise, Angel of Darkness (1QS 3.20–21), is another designation for Belial (301–302). 175 The terminology in 6:14–7:1 illustrates that Paul does not regard humans as totally passive victims unable to act. Indeed, the language in 6:14 “Do not be,” “Come out,” “Be separate,” “Touch not” in 6:17, and “Let us cleanse ourselves” in 7:1 indicates that Paul views human agency as important in the conflict between Christ and Belial. As believers, the Corinthians have been empowered to carry out the imperatives Paul commands. They are now an “addressable community” empowered by God to act in accordance with God’s ways. The helpful expression “addressable community” comes from J. Louis Martyn, “The Daily Life of the Church in the War Between the Spirit and the Flesh,” in Theological Issues in the Letters of Paul (Nashville: Abingdon, 1997), 263–264.

174

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

meant by the apostle in this instance, but his language here does suggest his belief in the existence of different spirits. In light of the context in which this verse appears, Paul regards the existence of this different spirit as related to the serpent figure in 11:3 and to Satan in 11:13–15. 176 This spirit is different from the Holy Spirit, which the Corinthians received in the past (11:4). Paul’s attentiveness to the spirit world in 2 Corinthians 10–13 makes this interpretation of a different spirit possible. Moreover, this view coheres with the earlier discussion in Chapter 2 where the relationship between the spirit world and knowledge was investigated. As seen above, Paul takes part in traditions where a connection between spirits and knowledge of God exists and such a connection finds expression here again. Paul’s wording then underscores the twotiered nature of the conflict at Corinth. The different gospel and the other Jesus proclaimed by the false apostles are intimately related to a different spirit.177 Paul portrays human beings, even believers, as susceptible to Satan’s attacks and ploys, and so the contest between God and Satan involves all human beings whether they realize it or not. The existence of the contest, however, does not mean the ultimate outcome is in question. For the apostle, there is no doubt that God triumphs over Satan and that Christ conquers Beliar.178 The list below highlights the dichotomy between God and Satan in 2 Corinthians.

176 For a number of interpreters, 11:4 is key for identifying Paul’s opponents. For example, Windisch argues that because “Jesus” appears here and not “Christ,” Paul’s opponents must have preached that Jesus was only human. They did not recognize him as the risen Lord. In addition, Windisch argues that the presence of the phrase “another gospel” means that Paul’s opponents proclaimed a similar message to the one proclaimed in Galatians (Der Zweite Korintherbrief, 328). The Corinthians must follow the law. Yet the absence of lawrelated guidelines such as circumcision makes this view unlikely. Dieter Georgi, The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians: A Study of Religious Propaganda, SNTW (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1986) proposes Hellenistic Jews who view Jesus as a divine man (286). 177 Martin writes, “The Corinthian readers have, under alien influences, accepted a ‘different spirit’ (πνεῦµα ἕτερον) from the Spirit Paul knew, i.e., the Spirit of the crucified Jesus as seen in his ministry, now attacked (12:18)” (2 Corinthians, 497). Furnish believes that Paul’s references to another Jesus, different gospel, and different spirit “is intended only as a general condemnation of their teaching – and, if so, it would not be any more precise than the criticism Paul directs against his opponents in Galatia” (II Corinthians, 501). 178 Engberg-Pedersen writes regarding the importance of the Geisterwelt to Paul’s view, “The reality and concreteness of Paul’s thinking on angels, demons, and Satan cannot be sufficiently emphasized. These were real beings, most probably at home in the heavenly sphere (possibly in its sublunary part), but also directly influential in the earthly sphere on and in human beings in particular. As was also emphasized by Martin Dibelius (1909 [Die Geisterwelt im Glauben des Paulus]), these powers were regularly understood by Paul to be malevolent and maleficent ones. They were God’s enemies, who would in the end be vanquished by the returning Christ” (Cosmology and Self, 93).

3.2 Interpreting the Passage Divine weapons (10:3–6) (τὰ ὅπλα δυνατὰ τῷ θεῷ) Gospel of God (11:7) The Jesus Paul preaches (11:4) Holy Spirit (3:6, 18; 13:13) Paul, an apostle (1:1) Fellow worker (6:1) God who reveals (4:6) Light (4:4, 6; 6:14) Paul, διάκονος (Servant) of God (3:6; 6:4; 11:23) Christ (6:15) Believers (6:15)

175

Fleshly weapons (10:3–6) (τὰ ὅπλα σαρκικά) A different gospel (11:4) Another Jesus (11:4) A different spirit (11:4) False apostles (11:13) Deceitful workers (11:13) God who blinds (4:4) Darkness (4:6) διάκονοι (Servants) of Satan (11:15) Beliar (6:15) Unbelievers (6:15)

Figure 3.3 Binary Contrasts in 2 Corinthians The table above underscores the profound dualistic elements within 2 Corinthians regarding God and Satan and their respective activitites. God supplies and empowers the apostle’s divine weapons and uses Paul as an agent of divine revelation. On the other hand, Satan is the god of this age who blinds, who sends super-apostles to deceive believers, and who transforms himself into an angel of light. Such a strong dichotomy between God and Satan suggests that Paul does not perceive the angel of Satan as coming from God. On the contrary, in light of Paul’s previous harsh language about Satan and his devices, it is possible that Satan is the giver of the thorn in the flesh. 3.2.3.2 Yperairōmai (Ὑπεραίρωµαι): An Alternative Interpretation As indicated above, some interpreters recognize the delicate problem of viewing God as the giver of the thorn in the flesh. Yet they believe that the thorn brings about a positive outcome, such as Paul’s humility. Harris represents this view well and is worth quoting at length: As for the agent behind the “giving,” there are obviously two possibilities – either Satan (or his ἄγγελος) or God (or Christ). If Satan was seen by Paul as sometimes a source of human illness (cf.1 Cor. 5:5) and the σκόλοψ was some physical malady, it is conceivable that the passive voice of ἐδόθη conceals a reference to Satan. However, because a positive spiritual purpose of the δοῦναι – to prevent over-elation or conceitedness – is stated in advance of the verb ἐδόθη, it is unlikely that Paul’s readers would assume Satanic agency in the giving of the “thorn.”179

Harris’s comments raise several issues that need addressing. The first is that the giving of the thorn has a positive spiritual purpose. Second, he highlights the common interpretation of ὑπεραίρωµαι as meaning conceited or having too much pride. And third, he draws attention to the standard conclusion that Paul’s 179

Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 855.

176

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

readers could not have conceived of the giver of the thorn as Satan. The last issue has been addressed above and so only deserves a brief response here. The strong dichotomy between God and Satan that Paul has outlined throughout 2 Corinthians highlights the possibility that Paul is not presenting the angel of Satan as given by God or as an entity that has a positive spiritual purpose. This dichotomy underscores the possibility that the Corinthians could perceive Satan as the giver of the thorn since this destructive behavior and tendency to oppose corresponds to the picture of Satan they have received from Paul previously (1 Cor 5:5, 7:5; 2 Cor 2:11, 4:4, 6:15, 11:3, 14–15). Moreover, Paul explicitly states what the purpose of the thorn entails by using three ἵνα clauses. Its purpose is to strike, beat, or harm him and to keep him from being lifted up. Thus, the three ἵνα clauses are to be read in tandem. Paul’s language regarding the violent nature of the angel of Satan corresponds to the actions of evil spirits found in the Book of Watchers and the Book of Parables examined briefly above. In addition, the apostle’s depiction of the angel’s actions coheres with the image of Satan that he has previously described to the Corinthians. In light of this discussion, it is possible that Paul does not view this angel of Satan as something positive or having a spiritual purpose. A number of interpreters view ὑπεραίρωµαι as denoting pride or conceit. This perspective partly arises from the only other place Paul uses the term, 2 Thessalonians 2:4, where he speaks regarding the man of lawlessness who exalts himself above God. However, both the context of the passage in 2 Thessalonians as well as its use with ἐπί plus the accusative (exalt oneself over) indicates that this word has a negative connotation in this pericope; the man of lawlessness will exalt himself over God. Yet our passage’s context does not automatically ascribe a negative frame of reference to ὑπεραίρωµαι. In the LXX ὑπεραίρωµαι occurs in Psalm 71:16 and does not denote anything negative but instead, refers to the abundance of fruit during the reign of a righteous king. In 2 Chronicles 32:23, the author uses the word to describe how Hezekiah was raised up or honored in the eyes of all the people. The word is not related to Hezekiah’s pride, only to the esteem or reverence held by the nations. Finally, in 2 Maccabees 5:23 the term does have a negative connotation, but this arises from the context. The author describes cruel governors whom Antiochus left to rule over the Jews. Menelaus is depicted as the most severe of the governors, lording his position over the citizens. Here again, context gives this word a meaning denoting abuse and power. As seen from these examples, this word does not automatically have the definition of pride or conceit unless the context suggests such an interpretation. The literal meaning is simply “to be lifted up.” Moreover, it is significant that αἴρω verbs appear in the context of other ascent texts. For example, προσαίρω appears in ALD in a prayer that Levi prays before he makes his ascent. He prays, “Cleanse my heart, Master, from all uncleanliness, and let me myself be

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

177

raised to you” (καθάρισον τὴν καρδίαν µου, δέσποτα, ἀπὸ πάσης ἀκαθαρσίας, καὶ προσάρωµαι πρός σε αὐτος). While Stone, Greenfield, and Eshel recognize the possibility that προσάρωµαι may be a middle, they also note the possibility that this word is a passive with which Levi refers proleptically to the vision he is about to receive. They write, “The meaning of προσάρωµαι ‘be raised’ is intriguing … it might be taken to express a type of religious experience that Levi expected to undergo as a result of his repentance, purification, and prayer. Indeed, following this prayer he receives a vision of the heavens on a height.”180 As Stone, Greenfield, and Eshel point out, Levi asks for purification of his heart and then after this purifying process to be raised to God. If this prayer refers to a supernatural event, then here is another instance where αἴρω language occurs in the context of an encounter with the divine. In Plotinus the use of αἴρω occurs to describe the soul’s ascent and desire to return to the Good. καὶ ἕως τί ἐστιν ἀνωτέρω τοῦ παρόντος, αἴρεται φύσει ἄνω αἰροµένη ὑπὸ τοῦ δόντος τὸν ἔρωτα. καὶ νοῦ µὲν ὑπεραίρει, οὐ δύναται δὲ ὑπὲρ τὸ ἀγαθὸν δραµεῖν, ὅτι µηδέν ἐστι τὸ ὑπερκεὶµενον.181 And as long as there is something higher than anything present, by nature it [the soul] rises above being raised by the one who gives love. And, indeed, it rises above the Intellect, but it is not able to run above the good, because there is nothing remaining above.

Here Plotinus writes about the soul’s movement toward the Good and its natural desire to return to the one who bestows love upon it. For Plotinus, although the mind or Intellect contains beautiful things, it cannot satisfy the ultimate longing of the soul for the Good and the light of the Good. Plotinus’ use of αἴρω and ὑπεραίρω to speak of the soul’s ascent, albeit in a mixed philosophical and mystical framework, demonstrates that this verb can occur in the context of an ascent with a meaning of “rising above.” Also, in a passage examined earlier in Book of Watchers 14:8–9, the word αἴρω occurs in Enoch’s description of his ascent. Καὶ ἐµοὶ ἐφ’ ὁράσει οὕτως ἐδείχθη· ἰδοὺ νεφέλαι ἐν τῇ ὁράσει ἐκάλουν καὶ ὁµίχλαι µε ἐφώνουν, καὶ διαδροµαὶ τῶν ἀστέρων καὶ διαστραπαί µε κατεσπούδαζον καὶ ἐθορύβαζόν µε, καὶ ἄνεµοι ἐν τῇ ὁράσει µου ἐξεπέτασάν µε καὶ ἐπῆράν µε ἄνω καὶ εἰσήνεγκάν µε εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν. 182 180

Jonas C. Greenfield, Michael E. Stone and Esther Eshel, eds., The Aramaic Levi Document, Edition, Translation, Commentary, SVTP 19 (Leiden: Brill, 2004), 132–133. Greenfield, Stone, and Eshel note the fragmentary nature of the Aramaic at this point (] ‫)על‬. They write, “The surviving Aramaic letters, although they cannot be translated, indicate that at least one hemistych was lost from the Greek text here” (132). Contrary to Greenfield, Stone, and Eshel, Henryk Drawnel dismisses the passive option and believes that the MS reads προς αρουµαι. Thus, he understands it to be a future middle, “I will raise myself up” (An Aramaic Wisdom Text from Qumran: A New Interpretation of the Levi Document [Leiden: Brill, 2004], 103). 181 Plotinus, Enn. 6.7.18–21 (Armstrong, LCL). Adapted translation by author. 182 Black, Apocalypsis Henochi Graece. Author’s translation.

178

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

(8) And in the vision it was shown to me in this manner, “Behold clouds in the vision were calling and mists of fog were beckoning me, and falling stars and lightning bolts were urging me and distracting me, and winds in my vision flew me up (9) and lifted me above and carried me into heaven.

In this excerpt, the winds lift Enoch up and bring him into heaven and the auther employs αἴρω to depict his ascent.183 In another text previously discussed, αἴρω occurs as well. In Plutarch’s story of Aridaeus the word appears to describe Aridaeus’s ascent. Ἐπεὶ γὰρ ἐξέπεσε τὸ φρονοῦν τοῦ σώµατος οἷον ἄν τις ἐκ πλοίου κυβερνήτης εἰς βυθὸν ἀπορριφεὶς πάθοι τὸ πρῶτον, οὕτως ὑπὸ τῆς µεταβολῆς ἔσχεν·εἶτα µικρὸν ἐξαρθεὶς ἔδοξεν ἀναπνεῖν ὅλος καὶ περιορᾶν πανταχόθεν, ὥσπερ ἑνὸς ὄµµατος ἀνοιχθείσης τῆς ψυχῆς.184 For after his mind came out of his body, at first he was somewhat like a captain of a boat being plunged into the depths; it was in this manner that he experienced a change; then it

183 Note also that the verb ἐπαίρω appears in 2 Cor 10:5 with ὕψωµα and in 2 Cor 11:20 to describe the actions of the super-apostles. In 10:5 ἐπαίρω describes the ὕψωµα being raised up against the knowledge of God. Context indicates that this αἴρω verb is used negatively. Here it describes something being lifted up against the knowledge of God. Whatever this entity may be (in Chapter 2 it was demonstrated that its identification included a cosmic entity), its purpose is to obstruct divine insight. It is possible that Paul implicitly refers to the angel of Satan in 10:5 and in 12:7 further fleshes out what he means by an ὕψωµα being raised against the knowledge of God. The angel of Satan he receives attempts to block him from obtaining revelation. In 11:20 the false apostles are being lifted up over the Corinthians. More than likely, ὑµᾶς is the object of ἐπαίρω, just as it is the object of the other verbs which depict the false apostles’ disturbing behavior. The Corinthians put up with the false apostles’ arrogant conduct. In both occurrences of ἐπαίρω something or someone is being lifted up against or over a particular object. It is possible that a link exists between the negative instances of this word. Paul connects the super-apostles’ behavior to the entity being raised against the knowledge of God, thereby indicating the obstructive mission of his rivals. He associates the super-apostles with every high entity being exalted against the knowledge of God (πᾶν ὕψωµα ἐπαιρόµενον κατὰ τῆς γνώσεως τοῦ θεοῦ), for their actions and their behavior participate in the impeding process. It is important to mention that some interpreters view ἐπαίρω in 10:5 and 11:20 as middle forms. For example, Fritz Rienecker believes this is the case (A Linguistic Key to the Greek New Testament: Volume 1 Matthew through Acts, ed. Cleon L. Rogers, Jr. [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976], 140, 145). In both instances it means to lift up or exalt oneself. While I have argued that these verbs are passives, construing them as middles does not change my argument to any great extent. Therefore, if one takes ἐπαίρω in 10:5 as a middle, then on my reading it would refer to any high entity lifting itself up against the knowledge of God. Even if this entity lifts itself up and is not being lifted up, it still refers to something opposing divine insight. Similarly, in 11:20 if one understands ἐπαίρω as a middle, rendering the phrase with the sense of the false apostles lifting themselves up, this reading still denotes their arrogance and prideful behavior toward the Corinthians. Harris believes that in 10:5 and in 11:20 ἐπαίρω is a passive form. Yet he thinks the passive form of ἐπαίρω in 11:20 is reflexive (Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 786). 184 Plutarch, Sera 563 (author’s translation).

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

179

seemed he was being raised up a little, breathing completely and seeing from every side, as if his soul was one opened eye.

These examples indicate that Paul’s use of an αἴρω verb, ὑπεραίρωµαι, to depict a mystical experience in which he moves from earth to the third heaven is not impossible. He connects ὑπεραίρωµαι to the revelations, not because ὑπεραίρωµαι points to pride about the revelations, but rather the word emphasizes the method by which he received them in this experience – by being raised up to the heavens. Such language resembles his earlier statements in 12:2–4 that he was snatched up to the third heaven. For Paul, rising up or being exalted is not negative, but leads to a positive outcome – visions and revelations of and from the Lord. 185 The apostle specifies that because he has such numerous extraordinary revelations, the angel of Satan attempts to hinder his revelatory encounters by beating him or striking him. Thus, the thorn serves as a means to hinder Paul from attaining knowledge of God through revelations.186 Just as Paul repeats the verb ἁρπάζω twice to speak of being caught up to the third heaven, in 12:2, 4 he uses the verb ὑπεραίρωµαι twice to describe

185 This interpretation does not suggest that Paul’s knowledge of God only comes from heavenly ascents. The concentration on heavenly ascents here derives from Paul’s focus in chapter 12. In 1 Cor 2:6–16, the apostle speaks of revelations from the Holy Spirit. 186 Brady also observes that ὑπεραίρωµαι should be used “in its more literal sense of ‘being raised too high’ and that the thorn in the flesh or messenger of satan refers to some kind of opposition or obstacle to Paul’s further ascent or revelations” (“Paul and Religious Experience,” 480). However, he does not work this out in any detail. See also Gooder, who also argues for a similar interpretation of ὑπεραίρωµαι. She argues that its meaning here is ‘raise oneself up physically’ and that Paul probably intends a pun by using this word (Only the Third Heaven?, 200). The following quote includes her translation of 7a and her subsequent conclusion: “Therefore lest I exalt myself, a thorn of the flesh was given to me, an angel of Satan to trouble me, lest I raise myself higher (i.e. into another heaven). Thus the double use of ὑπεραίρωµαι could mean both exalt oneself in esteem and raise oneself physically. The inability of Paul to do the latter affected his ability to do the former” (200). However, the present analysis has shown that the term is a synonym for ἁρπάζω and is a divine passive emphasizing God’s power in raising the apostle. Here, then, Paul signifies God’s power not his own.

180

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

being lifted up to heaven. 187 Thus, ὑπεραίρωµαι is a synonym for ἁρπάζω.188 In verses 5–6, he speaks briefly about boasting but then in 12:7 returns to the ascent experience as indicated by his reiteration of the term ἀποκάλυψις from 12:1. He ends v.4 by stating that he heard unspeakable words which a human being is not permitted to speak. In 12:7 he resumes narration of this experience by continuing to speak of the abundant and surpassing quality of his revelations (ἀποκάλυψις) whose immediate reference is v. 4. As a result of hearing such unspeakable things as well as the number and extraordinary quality of his revelations, Paul experiences an attack from the satanic realm which seeks to prevent him from accessing any further revelations.189 The passive voice of ἁρπάζω and ὑπεραίρωµαι denote God’s act of snatching and lifting him up.190 The passive voice of ἐδόθη indicates Satan’s action of bestowing an agent to attack Paul. This act of Satan’s angel to hinder him from being raised up illustrates the cosmic struggle between God and Satan around knowledge of God, in this case access through visions and revelations. It also underscores Paul’s position in this struggle, with the passive verbs indicating that God and Satan act upon Paul. The apostle finds himself caught between God’s action and the action of the angel of Satan and his position demonstrates human vulnerability to cosmic forces, and this experience highlights the nature of the conflict surrounding human access to knowledge of God. The apostle depicts Satan as 187 Barnett (The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 567) translates ὑπεραίρωµαι as “overuplifted.” He renders the term this way to account for the preposition ὕπερ and to denote over-uplifting in terms of pride. To be sure, ὕπερ appears alone (11:23) and in other parts of this letter (ὑπερλίαν ἀποστόλων; 11:5; 12:11; ὑπερβολῆ; 12:7). Hence, for Paul to use it now with αἴρω is not surprising. In his other uses of ὕπερ the term has the connotation of more and above the norm, i.e. super-apostles, and extraordinary. Here, however, ὑπεραίρω simply means to be lifted up or raised up just as we observed in the quote from Plotinus above. Plummer notes that Paul “is rather fond of such compounds; ὑπεραυξάνω, ὑπερβαίνω, ὑπερεντυγχάνω, ὑπερνικάω, ὑπερεκτείνω (x. 14), ὑπερπλεονάζω, ὑπερυψόω, all of which are ἅπαξ λεγόµενα in N.T” (Commentary on the Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 347–348). Although Harris takes ὑπεραίρωµαι to mean over-elated, he, too, recognizes that the prefix denotes excess (Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 851, 853). 188 That Paul uses ὑπεραίρωµαι as a synonym for ἁρπάζω provides an answer as to why Paul repeats the phrase ἵνα µὴ ὑπεραίρωµαι. Each occurrence of ὑπεραίρωµαι corresponds with each occurrence of ἁρπάζω. 189 Price argues that the thorn in the flesh is an angel similar to what is found in the hekhalot tradition (“Punished in Paradise,” 33–40). Morray-Jones likewise follows Price’s suggestion. He writes, “The ‘angel of Satan’ is reminiscent of the demonic ‘angels of destruction’ who seek to ‘do violence’ to Aqiba” (“Paradise Revisited,” 282–283). Yet Paul’s employment of martial imagery (σκόλοψ) to describe the satanic being and his depictions of its intent (ἵνα µὴ ὑπεραίρωµαι, ἵνα µε κολαφίζῃ) demonstrate his belief in the dangerous, obstructive, and combative nature of this entity and the reality of a larger cosmic contest. 190 Rienecker views ὑπεραίρωµαι as a middle, “to lift one’s self up beyond, to exalt one’s self” (A Linguistic Key to the Greek New Testament, 148). But Paul employs ὑπεραίρωµαι as a synonym for ἁρπάζω, and therefore, it is a passive.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

181

contesting divine insight, either by sending emissaries to turn believers away from the true gospel to a false one (11:4, 13–15) or by seeking to stop ascents into heaven. According to Paul, one of the ultimate aims of Satan is to prevent access to divine revelation. This obstruction can occur in different ways. In Paul’s case, he experiences resistance to his ascent. Yet opposition to divine knowledge appears in several forms in Jewish literature. The subsequent analysis will illustrate the existence of texts that contain patterns of opposition in descents from heaven and ascents to heaven. To these texts we now turn. 3.2.3.3 Opposition to Earthly Descents and Heavenly Ascents 3.2.3.3.1 Daniel In Daniel 10:1–21 the reader encounters a rich and complex scene. Daniel has a vision in which he sees an angel who brings him news about future events, and the vision is so great that he falls to the ground (10:9). The angel touches Daniel and admonishes him not to fear. He then proceeds to tell the seer: “ὅτι ἀπὸ τῆς ἡµέρας τῆς πρώτης, ἧς ἔδωκας τὸ πρόσωπόν σου διανοηθῆναι καὶ ταπεινωθῆναι ἐναντίον κυρίου τοῦ θεοῦ σου, εἰσηκούσθη τὸ ῥῆµά σου, καὶ ἐγὼ εἰσῆλθον (ἐν) τῷ ῥήµατί σου. καὶ ὁ στρατηγὸς βασιλέως Περσῶν ἀνθειστήκει ἐναντίον µου εἴκοσι καὶ µίαν ἡµέραν, καὶ ἰδοὺ Μιχαηλ εἷς τῶν ἀρχόντων τῶν πρώτων ἐπῆλθε βοηθῆσαί µοι, καὶ αὐτὸν ἐκεῖ κατέλιπον µετὰ τοῦ στρατηγοῦ τοῦ βασιλέως Περσῶν.” καὶ εἶπέν µοι “Ἠλθον ὑποδεῖξαί σοι τί ὑπαντήσεται τῷ λαῷ σου ἐπ’ ἐσχάτου τῶν ἡµερῶν, ἔτι γὰρ ὅρασις εἰς ἡµέρας.” καὶ ἐν τῷ αὐτὸν λαλῆσαι µετ’ ἐµοῦ τὰ προστάγµατα ταῦτα ἔδωκα τὸ πρόσωπόν µου ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν καὶ ἐσιώπησα (10:12–15). “Because from the first day on which you set your face to understand and to be humbled before the Lord your God, your word was heard, and I came because of your word. But the leader of the kingdom of Persia resisted, opposing me twenty-one days. Then behold Michael, one of the chief rulers, came to help me, and I left him there with the leader of the kingdom of Persia.” And he said to me, “I came to show you what will happen to your people at the end of days, for there is still a vision for the days.” And while he was sharing these statements with me, I placed my face on the ground and I was silent.191

Here otherworldly visions and revelations are modes of knowledge and understanding for human beings, and angels are a source of insight. In addition, the angelic being depicts the heavenly realm as a place of struggle and conflict which invariably affects humanity. In this case it delayed an answer to Daniel’s prayer for understanding. The angel experiences resistance in his attempt to answer Daniel due to the Ruler of Persia. Here ὁ στρατηγὸς and ἄρχων translates the term ‫ שר‬which also occurs in Joshua 5:14 and in 1QS 3:20 in reference to

191

Author’s translation.

182

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

an angel.192 Verse 13 points to the notion that existed during this time that nations have angelic counterparts.193 The Ruler of the kingdom of Persia is the “patron angel of Persia.”194 The earthly conflict among nations reflects the heavenly conflicts between the various angels. 195 In v. 20 the angel again refers to a battle, stating that he has to return to fight against the ruler of Persia and the ruler of Greece (10:20).196 John Collins observes the significance of this battle for the book of Daniel, writing that, “The supernatural backdrop is of crucial importance for Daniel’s conception of history…. It is rooted in a common mythological assumption that whatever happens on earth is a reflection of a celestial archetype.”197 As Collins notes, this scenario presents an important view of history in which the conflict between the angel and the ruler of Persia reflects a clash between patron angels of these respective nations. The delay the angel encounters in giving information to Daniel illustrates that here we have to do with opposition to divine revelations. James Montgomery also notes the obstruction by the angel. He asserts, “The angel had been prevented on the way by the Prince of Persia, who desired to impede the divine oracle before it had been irrevocably published.”198 Opposition to the seer’s reception of divine insight comes to the fore in this account. Likewise, Alan R. Millard views the delay as an attempt to stop the publication of the oracle. “Persia’s guardian angel opposed the errand, for it would disclose the downfall of his protectorate. Once uttered the word was sure; unpublished it might be changed.” 199 For each of these interpreters, to obstruct the announcement of a divine oracle may prevent the event from coming to pass; if it is not revealed, it cannot be carried out. Despite this resistance, however, the angel prevails and grants Daniel a heavenly vision and revelation about the end of days. Although this passage is not an ascent account in which human beings ascend to heaven, the descent of the angelic being to Daniel does provide valuable information about journeys between heaven and earth. Even for angelic beings that descend to earth, the trip can be filled with battles with

192 John J. Collins, Daniel: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994), 375. The term also appears in CD 5.18 and two passages discussed in Chapter 2, the War Scroll 13.10 and 17.5–6. 193 Ibid. 194 Ibid., 374. 195 Ibid., 374–375; Daniel L. Smith-Christopher, The Book of Daniel, NIB 7 (Nashville: Abingdon, 1994), 137–138. 196 Smith-Christopher, Daniel, 137–138. 197 John J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 110. 198 James Montgomery, The Book of Daniel, ICC (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1927), 411. 199 Alan R. Millard, “Daniel,” in NIBC, ed. F. F. Bruce (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979), 866–867.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

183

other suprahuman beings. 200 Thus, the path between the heavens and the earth can be a perilous one. In addition, the Daniel episode foregrounds the relationships between anthropology, cosmology, and epistemology in journeys between the two realms. Human knowledge of and from the divine realm can occur through visions and from heavenly beings. Yet conflict in the heavenly sphere affects human reception of knowledge from the divine sphere. Daniel’s revelation is a hidden one that God grants especially to him, for he receives privileged insight into earthly events. Collins fittingly remarks that this angelic disclosure reveals that “the true meaning of events is not publicly evident but is known to the wise, through revelations.” 201 Collins correctly points out that the revelation Daniel receives gives him understanding of world events. The angel provides Daniel with a “back-stage” pass, so to speak, granting him awareness into the goings on of the heavenly realm. What one sees in the earthly sphere is not all there is to see. The actions in the heavenly realm indicate the unfolding of a greater story. In a similar vein, Paul becomes privy to the events happening in the divine realm. He hears unutterable words and has extraordinary revelations, and because of the remarkable revelations, he was given an angel of Satan. His heavenly rapture, then, reveals the cosmic contest around divine knowledge. He shares his ascent account with the Corinthians, including the opposition to his ascent, so that they too may know what is going on behind the scenes. The advent of the false apostles into their congregations is about more than persuasive and powerful personalities who speak eloquently. Their actions are part of a larger conflict around the knowledge of God in which satanic forces are at work. Paul’s revelatory experience highlights this reality and locates the real struggle between suprahuman powers. 3.2.3.3.2 Apocalypse of Abraham In the Apocalypse of Abraham, Abraham receives counsel from God before he ascends to heaven. 202 God tells Abraham to fast for forty days and to offer sacrifices on a high mountain, which is called God’s holy mountain. If Abraham completes these tasks, God promises him that, “I will announce to you guarded things and you will see great things which you have not seen, because you desired to search for me, and I called you my beloved.” 203 God also promises Abraham, “I will show you the things which were made by the ages and by my 200

Note in particular the martial overtones of ὁ στρατηγὸς and ἀνθειστήκει. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination, 111. 202 Scholars believe Apocalypse of Abraham was written either in the late first century, after 70 CE but before the middle of the second. See Ryszard Rubinkiewicz, “Apocalypse of Abraham,” in OTP, ed. James H. Charlesworth (New York: Doubleday, 1985), 1:683. 203 9:6. All translations from Ryszard Rubinkiewicz, “Apocalypse of Abraham,” 1:693. 201

184

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

word, and affirmed, created, and renewed.”204 God then sends the angel Iaoel to bless him and strengthen him for the journey. 205 After Abraham offers the sacrifices and prepares himself, an unclean bird appears, which is Azazel, the chief of the fallen angels. By instilling fear in Abraham, he attempts to persuade Abraham to abandon his present course. And the unclean bird spoke to me and said, “What are you doing, Abraham, on the holy heights, where no one eats or drinks, nor is there upon them food for men. But these all will be consumed by fire and they will burn you up. Leave the man who is with you and flee! For if you ascend to the height, they will destroy you.” And it came to pass when I saw the bird speaking I said this to the angel: “What is this, my lord?” And he said, “This is disgrace, this is Azazel!” And he said to him, “Shame on you Azazel! For Abraham’s portion is in heaven, and yours is on earth, for you have selected here, (and) become enamored of the dwelling place of your blemish. Therefore the Eternal Ruler, the Mighty One, has given you a dwelling on earth. Through you the all-evil spirit (is) a liar, and through you (are) wrath and trials on the generations of men who live impiously. For the Eternal, Mighty One did not allow the bodies of the righteous to be in your hand, so through them the righteous life is affirmed and the destruction of ungodliness. Hear, counselor, be shamed by me! You have no permission to tempt all the righteous. Depart from this man! You cannot deceive him, because he is the enemy of you and of those who follow you and who love what you wish. For behold, the garment which in heaven was formerly yours has been set aside for him, and the corruption which was on him has gone over to you.”206

In this scene one notices several elements germane to the present discussion. First, Azazel comments on Abraham’s physical position: he is on the holy mountain, a place where humans should not be, which indicates a crossing of established boundaries. This crossing of boundaries portends the possibility of great peril. Second, Azazel attempts to stop Abraham by telling him about the dangers of the journey he is about to undertake. He informs Abraham that destruction awaits him if he continues, thereby attempting to instill fear in Abraham and to keep him from ascending. 207 In the next scene, Iaoel grants Abraham the means by which to rebuke Azazel and to thwart his deceptive opposition. And the angel said to me, “Abraham!” And I said, “Here I am, your servant.” And he said, “Know from this that the Eternal One whom you have loved has chosen you. Be bold and do through your authority whatever I order you against him who reviles justice. Will I not be able to revile him who has scattered about the earth the secrets of heaven and who has taken counsel against the Mighty One? Say to him, ‘May you be the firebrand of the furnace of the 204

9:9. Ibid. 10:3–6. Ibid., 1:693–694. 206 13:4–14. Ibid., 1:695. 207 David J. Halperin (The Faces of the Chariot: Early Jewish Responses to Ezekiel’s Vision [Tübingen: Mohr, 1988]) observes that this narrative reflects that the exaltation of humans and the degradation of the angel correspond to each other and depend upon each other to some extent. He notes that this theme is also found in the Book of Watchers and in the Apocalypse of Moses (111). 205

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

185

earth! Go, Azazel, into the untrodden parts of the earth. For your heritage is over those who are with you, with the stars and with the men born by the clouds, whose portion you are, indeed they exist through your being. Enmity is for you a pious act. Therefore through your own destruction be gone from me!’” And I said the words as the angel had taught me. And he said, “Abraham.” And I said, “Here I am, your servant!” And the angel said to me, “Answer him not!” And he spoke to me a second time. And the angel said, “Now, whatever he says to you, answer him not, lest his will run up to you. For the Eternal, Mighty One gave him the gravity and the will. Answer him not.” And I did what the angel had commanded me. And whatever he said to me about the descent, I answered him not.208

A clear picture of Azazel’s character comes through these narrative excerpts. Iaoel depicts him as one who opposes God and one who exerts power over humanity. Yet he can also be resisted with divine assistance, such as through the words spoken to Abraham by Iaoel. Azazel does not give up, even after Abraham utters the words Iaoel commands. But because of divine aid, Azazel does not prevent Abraham’s ascent, and he proceeds to ascend to heaven and to see the wonders of God. Although Azazel does not strike or beat Abraham as the angel of Satan does in Paul’s ascent episode, he does oppose Abraham’s journey by attempting to instill fear in Abraham and persuade him to turn back. This story, then, exhibits a pattern of opposition to ascents. Nonetheless, Iaoel’s presence insures Abraham’s success. 3.2.3.3.3 Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah The Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah consists of two parts. Chapters 1–5 describe Isaiah’s martyrdom, and chapters 6–11 chronicle Isaiah’s ascent through the seven heavens. Many scholars believe that the Martyrdom of Isaiah is Jewish and is the oldest element of the work, while the Ascension of Isaiah is a later Christian work. Moreover, it seems that chapters 6–11 circulated independently in a second Latin translation and a Slavonic translation under the title Vision of Isaiah. 209 An editor combined these two works at an unknown time, possibly during the 3rd or 4th century. The date for the work ranges from 2nd century BCE to 4th century CE.210 Thus, although the Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah is more than likely later than Paul’s letters, it may shed light on an older tradition in which Satan becomes angry at visions or revelations received by God’s chosen prophets. In several places throughout the work, Satan, also called Beliar and Sammael in this text, takes great displeasure at Isaiah’s visions. 208

14:1–14. Rubinkiewicz, “Apocalypse of Abraham,” 1:695–696. See Michael A. Knibb, “Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah: A New Translation and Introduction,” in OTP, ed. James H. Charlesworth (New York: Doubleday, 1985), 2:144– 145. Knibb notes that the Ascension is only completely extant in Ethiopic. 210 See Knibb, “Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah,” who believes that although the Ascension section of the book existed by the 3rd century CE, it probably is much older than that. He posits a 2nd century CE date (2:149–150). 209

186

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

For Beliar was very angry with Isaiah because of the vision, and because of the exposure with which he had exposed Sammael, and that through him there had been revealed the coming of the Beloved from the seventh heaven (3:13).211 Because of these visions, therefore, Beliar was angry with Isaiah, and he dwelt in the heart of Manasseh, and he sawed Isaiah in half with a wood saw (5:1). For Sammael was very angry with Isaiah from the days of Hezekiah, king of Judah, because of the things which he had seen concerning the Beloved, and because of the destruction of Sammael which he had seen through the Lord, while Hezekiah his father was king (5:15– 16). Because of these visions and prophecies Sammael Satan sawed Isaiah the son of Amoz, the prophet, in half by the hand of Manasseh (11:41).

In each instance, the author repeats that Satan’s anger and hostility arise due to Isaiah’s visions. This fierce opposition eventually leads to Isaiah’s death. These compositions, although later than Paul, may bear witness to the presence of earlier traditions in which Satan opposes those who experience visions and revelations from the Lord. Thus, this narrative provides examples of a pattern of opposition from the satanic realm to knowledge of God, especially insight gained from visions and revelations. Moreover, in chapter 7 as Isaiah goes up to the firmament, he views a struggle within the atmosphere. And we went into the firmament, I and he [his angel guide], and there I saw Sammael and his hosts; and there was a great struggle in it, and the words of Satan, and they were envying one another. And as above, so also on earth, for the likeness of what (is) in the firmament is here on earth. And I said to the angel, “What is this envying?”212 And he said to me, “So it has been ever since this world existed until now, and this struggle (will last) until the one comes whom you are to see, and he will destroy him” (7:9–12).

This episode provides interesting information for several reasons. First, it reveals an intense clash in the heavens. Second, it connects the contest taking place in the heavens with an earthly one: the earthly battle reflects the heavenly combat. Third, the episode relates the antiquity of the contest. The struggle began in the beginning of time and will continue until the end of time. The violence of this realm appears again in 10:29. As Isaiah watches the Lord descend, he observes what happens there. And again he descended into the firmament where the prince of this world dwells, and he gave the password to those who (were) on the left, and his form (was) like theirs, and they did not praise him there; but in envy they were fighting one another, for there is there a power of evil and envying about trifles. And I saw when he descended and made himself 211 All translations are from Knibb, “Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah,” unless otherwise noted. 212 Interestingly, in Latin 1 the phrase reads “What is this war, and what is this envying?” In Latin 2 and the Slavonic it reads, “What is this war and envying and struggle?” See Note J in Knibb, “Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah,” 2:166.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

187

like the angels of the air, that he was like one of them. And he did not give the password, for they were plundering and doing violence to one another (10:29–31).

These last two episodes taken from Isaiah’s ascension illustrate the violence on the pathway between the heavens and the earth and the violent nature of Satan and his hosts. Although the angels exhibit violence toward each other and not towards the visionary, the hostile nature of these beings and the harsh environment between the heavens and the earth are apparent. 3.2.3.3.4 Rabbinic and Ηekhalot Literature In later Jewish literature, specifically Hekhalot Zutarti and Merkabah Rabbah, there is an ascent account where the ascender, Rabbi Aqiba, meets hostility and resistance.213 The following excerpt comes from Hekhalot Zutarti and Merkabah Rabbah C1–2b: 213

One of the often cited passages from Rabbinic literature used to indicate the background of Paul’s ascent is the story of the four men who entered a garden or orchard (pardes). The story appears in rabbinic and hekhalot literature. It appears in the Tosefta, the Jerusalem Talmud, and the Babylonian Talmud. The connection between this story and Paul was made as early as Bousset, “Die Himmelsreise,” 147–148. Other interpreters who follow this course include Gershom G. Scholem, Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, and Talmudic Tradition, 2nd ed. (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1965); Morray-Jones, “Paradise Revisited.” The following translation comes from the Tosefta and is from Peter Schäfer. I have included the manuscript variants within his translation, “New Testament and Hekhalot Literature,” in Hekhalot-Studien (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1988), 239: “Four entered (nikhnesu) into pardes: Ben Azzai, Ben Zoma, Aḥer and R. Aqiva. [One looked (heṣiṣ) and died; one looked and suffered harm (nifga‛); one looked and cut down the shoots (=young plants) (qiṣṣeṣ ba-neṭi‛ot); one ascended in peace (‛alah) and descended in peace (yarad) (this phrase does not appear in Erfurt Ms).] Ben Azzai looked and died. Of him Scripture says, Precious in the eyes of the Lord is the death of his pious (Ps. 116:15). Ben Zoma looked and suffered harm. Of him Scripture says, If you have found honey, eat only that which does you good (lest you grow tired of it and vomit it out) (Prov. 25:16). Aḥer looked and cut down the shoots. Of him Scripture says, Let not your mouth lead your flesh into sin (and say not before the angel that it was an oversight. Why should God be angry at your voice and destroy the work of your hands?) (Eccl. 5:5–6). Rabbi Aqiva entered in peace (nikhnas) and came out in peace (yaṣa) (The Vienna Ms has ascended and descended in place of entered in peace and came out in peace). Of him Scripture says, Draw me after you, we desire to run, etc. (The king brought me into his chambers) (Song 1:4).” The controversy regarding this story is whether or not it refers to an actual ascent. Some versions of the story contain ascent language (i.e. ascend/descend), whereas others do not. Therefore, for some interpreters the narrative was in its earliest state non-mystical and only later came to be interpreted as an ascent text in the 3rd or 4th century CE. For Schäfer, the language of ascent and descent is a secondary addition. Moreover, Schäfer argues that pardes should be understood as garden or royal garden and not Paradise. If understood in this way, the entering in and going out makes sense. In addition, he notes that pardes is not combined anywhere else in Hekhalot literature with ascending and descending. For Schäfer, the story of the four represents an allegory to illustrate four kinds of Torah teachers (240–241, 243). See also Peter

188

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

C1 R. Aqiba said: C2a At that time, when I went up to the heavenly height, I made more signs in the entrances of ‫ רקיע‬than in the entrances of my house, C2b and when I arrived at the curtain [‫ ]פרגוד‬angels of destruction [‫]מלאכי חבלה‬214 came forth to do me violence. The Holy One, blessed be he, said to them: Leave this elder alone, for he is worthy to behold my glory (‫)ראוי להסתכל בכבודי‬.”215

As Morray-Jones notes, the appearance of the angels of destruction who want to do violence to Aqiba in this story echoes the “angel of satan” in Paul’s account.216 In both cases, the visionary faces opposition from angels.217 However, here the opposition does not come from an angel of Satan as in Paul’s account but by angels who guard God’s throne.218 Though the opposition may come

Schäfer, “New Testament and Hekhalot Literature: The Journey into Heaven in Paul and in Merkavah Mysticism,” JJS 35 (1984): 19–35. Morray-Jones however, argues that these texts contain genuine visionary experiences of the rabbis and the traditions they exhibit go back to the 1st century and earlier (“Paradise Revisited,” 177–217, 265–292). As stated above, Bousset (“Die Himmelsreise”) was among the first to propose a connection between Paul’s ascent experience and rabbinic practices. He writes “Es kann somit kaum noch zweifelhaft sein, dass die rabbinischen Zunftgenossen des Paulus mit der Kunst, ins Paradies einzugehen, vertraut waren. Was man geneigt ist, als persönlichstes Eigentum des Paulus anzusehen, die Erfahrungen, von denen er II Kor 12 berichtet, ist der äusseren Form der ekstatischen Erlebnisse nach durchaus Eigentum der Schule, nicht des einzelnen Mannes, und von Paulus aus seiner rabbinischen Vergangenheit in sein neues Leben herübergenommen” (147–148). 214 This portion of the Hebrew text is not included in Morray-Jones’ citation of the passage. I have incorporated it for emphasis and to highlight its connection with other instances where we have seen similar terminology in previous texts. 215 Translation and line enumeration from Morray-Jones, “Paradise Revisited,” 197–198. The following Hebrew text comes from Peter Schäfer, Synopse zur Hekhalot-Literatur, TSAJ 2 (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1981), §346: ‫אמר עקיבא באותה שעה שעליתי במרום נתתי סימן במבואות הרקיע יותר ממבואות של ביתי וכשהיגעתי‬ ‫לפרגוד יצאו מלאכי חבלה לחבלני אמר להם הקבה הניחו לזקן הזה שהוא ראוי להסתכל בכבודי‬ 216 Morray-Jones, “Paradise Revisited,” 282–283; Windisch, Der Zweite Korintherbrief, 375–376; Price, “Punished in Paradise,” 382–290. See also discussion of Price above. Morray-Jones does note that the doubt surrounding this narrative’s original meaning and historical trajectory has created hesitancy regarding connecting the story with Paul’s experience. Yet he does think that the story provides significant background for the apostle’s ascent. If this story does refer to a mystical encounter, the notion of an angelic being attempting to harm a human being entering the heavenly realm is an important one, especially in light of the other texts examined in this chapter. 217 Gooder, Only the Third Heaven?, 197–200. 218 Morray-Jones finds this detail as one of the important indicators that “merkabah mysticism was, therefore, a central feature of Paul’s experience and self-understanding” (“Paradise Revisited,” 283). While the similarity between Paul’s account and the Jewish pardes

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

189

from a different quarter, it still exists. God intervenes, however, and protects the ascender. The similarities in these episodes indicate what has been demonstrated in the examination of all of the above texts thus far: the recognition that opposition and violence take place in the heavenly realms. Those who traverse paths from earth to heaven or from heaven to earth may face opposition. Thus, whether the ascent development happened later or earlier in this rabbinic literature, the presence of the opposition motif suggests the recognition of danger and obstruction in the heavenly realms. As the present investigation has shown, this motif recurs in various forms in different places in Jewish literature and takes on a variety of nuances in different times and places in these writings. A common thread is the hostility encountered when traversing paths between the earthly and the heavenly. These texts exhibit an acknowledgement in various circles of Jewish literature that patterns of opposition exist regarding descents to earth and ascents to heaven.219 3.2.3.3.5 Summary of 12:1–7 As demonstrated in the foregoing analysis, the apostle uses language found in Jewish and Greco-Roman ascents and in other Hellenistic religious practices such as ὀπτασία καὶ ἀποκάλυψις, ἄρρητος, ἁρπάζω, ὑπεραίρω, and a reference to a number of heavens. 220 Although Paul uses terms and perspectives found in other ascents, his own account differs in several respects. As Wallace observes, “Paul shows points of similarity with many of the ascent traditions…, but he replicates none of them.” 221 Paul echoes the language of divine encounters in other texts, but he presents his episode as uniquely his own. The patterns of opposition in earthly descents and heavenly ascents found in other mystical accounts become more pronounced and nuanced in Paul’s own experience. Paul faces opposition as a result of and subsequent to his revelatory encounters in 12:1–4. Due to traveling to the third heaven and to having the extraordinary revelations of 12:4 in which he hears words he cannot repeat, a thorn in the story is significantly interesting, these similarities do not necessarily imply that Paul participates in merkabah mysticism or that he participates in the use of mystical techniques common in merkabah mysticism. 219 In his monograph, Tabor also observes, “During this period, movement between the realms of heaven and earth, whether by gods or men, is increasingly seen as a difficult or even dangerous enterprise. In spatial terms one can speak of distance–a greatly expanded universe–but what is often involved is the belief that a host of intermediate (usually hostile) powers separate humans from the higher levels of heaven…. In either case power is needed over the forces which separate the two realms (Things Unutterable, 68). 220 Tabor: “We do know that since [Paul] uses technical terms for various levels of heavens and orders of angelic/demonic powers, none of which are found in the Torah or Prophets, and that in a general way he participates in this ‘explosion’ of interest in the unseen world among Jews in Second Temple times” (Things Unutterable, 123). 221 Wallace, Snatched into Paradise, 166.

190

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

flesh, an angel of Satan was given to him (12:7). Thus, this angel comes after the incidents narrated in 12:2–4 and as a result of what has taken place in those verses. By using ὑπεραίρω, the apostle conveys that an angel of Satan appears to prevent him from being raised more. Because of what Paul has already witnessed, Satan attempts to stop him from being lifted up to receive any further revelations. The apostle does not recount how he recognizes the angel of Satan nor how he comes to understand the angel’s actions as blocking him from ascending. For him, these details as well as the details of his heavenly journey are unimportant. What is most important to convey to the Corinthians is the conflict surrounding knowledge of the Lord. His description of the angel as a σκόλοψ suggests his perception of the angel’s actions through a military lens and as part of a cosmic contest. And, as discussed above, the use of αἴρω verbs in the context of an ascent is not without precedent. Therefore, the apostle reveals a satanic strategy to hinder revelatory encounters and to stop access to knowledge of the divine realm. Additionally, the apostle’s portrayal of the angel of Satan corresponds to the martial language and his depiction of Satan earlier in the letter and in previous correspondence. In his communication with the Corinthians, Paul has constructed a “cultural encyclopedia” for them regarding Satan: Satan as deceiver, as god of this age, and as an opponent of divine knowledge.222 To portray Satan, then, as one who opposes his ascent coheres with his earlier delineations regarding this being. When the Corinthians hear Paul describe the messenger of Satan’s actions as ἵνα µὴ ὑπεραίρωµαι this language corresponds with the image and beliefs now present in their own understanding of satanic methodology (cf. 2:11). Paul assumes their “encyclopedic competence” based upon what he has communicated to them thus far.223 The apostle states these phrases in a context which allows the Corinthians to select the interpretants (Satan as one who harms and opposes) that fit his earlier descriptions: Satan obstructs divine insight. 224 Paul’s own ascent story highlights this characteristic of Satan in a profound manner. Consequently, v. 7 can be translated in the following way: And because of the extraordinary nature of the revelations; indeed for this very reason, in order that I may not be lifted up, a thorn in the flesh was given to me, an angel of Satan, in order to strike me, so that I may not be lifted up.

This translation is consistent with Paul’s statements in this passage and elsewhere that he has experienced revelations (Gal 1:16; 2:2). As such, it points to

222

The language of “cultural encyclopedia” comes from Eco, The Limits of Interpretation, 266. See the discussion of Eco’s work in 1.5.3 223 The notion of “encyclopedic competence” is from Eco, The Limits of Interpretation, 145 and Umberto Eco, A Theory of Semiotics (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1976), 113. 224 The term “interpretants” derives from Eco, The Limits of Interpretation, 143–145, 266.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

191

the fact that Paul values these experiences as significant for gaining understanding of God even though he perceives the satanic angel as a dangerous agent directly opposed to such encounters. Yet since Paul refers to ὀπτασία καὶ ἀποκάλυψις in the plural in 12:1, he indicates that the angel of Satan does not succeed in its obstruction, for he continues to have revelatory experiences despite the oppositional tactics of the enemy. In his ascent, Paul brings his audience full circle to what he states in 10:4– 5: “Every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God.” In 12:7 Paul fleshes out more fully what those high things involve: hostile satanic beings. The angel of Satan, in its attempt to obstruct Paul, exalts itself against the knowledge of God, and just as the enemy opposes his ascent and reception of knowledge about God, so too is the enemy at work among the Corinthians, utilizing the false apostles to create arguments against the gospel. Whether by blinding minds, using false apostles to spread a false gospel, or sending angels to oppose ascents, Satan attempts to block the bestowal of divine insight. Satan has many devices to try to accomplish this objective, and one must not be ignorant of any of them (2:11). 3.2.4 Textual Analysis 12:8–10 (8) ὑπὲρ τούτου τρὶς τὸν κύριον παρεκάλεσα ἵνα ἀποστῇ ἀπ’ ἐµοῦ. (9) καὶ εἴρηκέν µοι· ἀρκεῖ σοι ἡ χάρις µου, ἡ γὰρ δύναµις ἐν ἀσθενείᾳ τελεῖται. Ἥδιστα οὖν µᾶλλον καυχήσοµαι ἐν ταῖς ἀσθενείαις µου, ἵνα ἐπισκηνώσῃ ἐπ’ ἐµὲ ἡ δύναµις τοῦ Χριστοῦ. (10) διὸ εὐδοκῶ ἐν ἀσθενείαις, ἐν ὕβρεσιν, ἐν ἀνάγκαις, ἐν διωγµοῖς καὶ στενοχωρίαις, ὑπὲρ Χριστοῦ· ὅταν γὰρ ἀσθενῶ, τότε δυνατός εἰµι. (8) About such a thing, I prayed three times to the Lord, that it would go away from me. (9) And he said to me, “My grace is enough for you, for power is manifested in weakness.” Therefore, gladly I will boast all the more in my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell upon me. (10) Therefore, I am content in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, and in difficulties for the sake of Christ; for whenever I am weak, then I am strong.

3.2.4.1 Paul’s Prayer The danger of the divine realm becomes even more evident in Paul’s disclosure that he prayed to the Lord for deliverance from the angel of Satan. Although the apostle does not relate the specific words of his prayer, he does inform the Corinthians of the general content. He prays that this angel of Satan, which strikes him, may depart from him, indicating his belief in the Lord’s sovereignty over the spirit world. Two important terms for discussion appear in 12:8, παρακαλέω and ἀφίστηµι. As discussed in Chapter 2, Paul uses παρακαλέω several times in 2 Corinthians. 225 In these instances, he employs the term in the

225

See discussion in 2.2

192

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

sense of consolation or urging his audience to some kind of action. In the gospels, it is a term often used to describe a request to Jesus (cf. Matt 8:5, 14:36, 26:33; Mk 1:40, 5:10, 12, 17f, 23, 6:56) and so here corresponds with Paul’s own request to the Lord. Paul relates that he asks the Lord three times for the removal of the thorn.226 The verb ἀφίστηµι appears in the NT in reference to persons (cf. Lk 2:37, 8:13; Acts 5:37–38, 22:29) as well as to the departure of angels (Acts 12:10).227 Paul’s request for the removal of this satanic being corresponds to other ancient prayers in which a person asks God to remove an evil spirit. In these prayers the petitioner “implore[s] God to remove, disempower, or drive away an evil being or beings.”228 Loren Stuckenbruck notes in his article “Prayers of Deliverance from the Demonic,” that by the turn of the 1st century CE petitionary prayers began to include requests for deliverance or protection from suprahuman entities.229 The subsequent discussion will show that Paul’s prayer to the Lord falls into this category of deliverance prayer by examining several prayers of deliverance: ALD, 11Q5, and a Noahic prayer in Jubilees, all of

226 Various scholars often take note of the significance of three. Furnish (II Corinthians, 529) cites the importance of three in Ps 55:16–17, Dan 6:10, 13, 1QS 10.1–7 and 1QHa 12.3– 9. Windisch (Der Zweite Korintherbrief, 389) points out the importance of three to Aaron’s blessing, Elijah breathing upon the widow’s son three times and the Jewish custom of praying three times a day. Both Furnish (II Corinthians, 529) and Hans Dieter Betz (“Eine Christus-Aretalogie bei Paulus [2 Kor 12,7–10],” ZTK 66 [1969]: 293) highlight the presence of three-fold prayers in healing stories. A number of scholars also mention Jesus’s three-fold prayer in Gethsemane whether or not they think a connection here is a valid one. For example, Gräßer (Der Zweite Brief an die Korinther) does see a link between the two narratives: “Da die Zahl »drei« Anfang, Mitte und Ende umschließt, wird durch sie ein Geschehen »als vollständig, geschlossen und endgültig« bezeichnet. Wie in Gethsemane dient sie folglich »nicht nur der Steigerung und Hervorhebung«, sondern bringt »vielmehr ein Geschehen zur Entscheidung« … D.h., das dreimalige Bittgebet des Paulus um Befreiung von seinen Leiden zeigt an, dass es sich um ein definitiv unerfülltes Bitten gehandelt hat, das gleichwohl – wie V.9 zeigen wird – nicht ohne Erhörung geblieben ist, sondern zu einem »Heilungswunder« der ganz besonderen Art geführt hat, nämlich zur theologischen Einsicht in das verfügte Paradoxon der Kraft in Schwachheit (V.10)” (201–202). 227 Martin cites 1 Tim 4:1; 2 Tim 2:19; Heb 3:12; Lk 4:13 (2 Corinthians, 417). 228 Stuckenbruck, “Prayers of Deliverance,” 147. 229 Ibid., 146. Stuckenbruck observes that prayer about spiritual powers had a variety of forms in “non-biblical Second Temple literature.” He divides these forms into three categories: a) adjurations addressed to the evil beings themselves, b) songs or hymnic prayers to manage their effect, and c) songs or prayers to God for removal of evil spirits (see pgs. 146– 148). This study proposes that Paul’s prayer falls into the last category. Cf. Hermann Lichtenberger, “Qumran and the New Testament,” in The Changing Face of Judaism, Christianity, and Other Greco-Roman Religions in Antiquity, eds. Ian H. Henderson and Gerbern S. Oegema, JSHRZ 2 (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlaghaus, 2006), 103–129, especially 121– 126.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

193

which are roughly contemporaneous with Paul.230 In Chapter 2 portions of ALD were discussed, and now sections of ALD germane to the present discussion follow: 7 Μάκρυνον ἀπ’ ἐµοῦ, κύριε, τὸ πνεῦµα τὸ ἄδικον καὶ διαλογισµὸν τὸν πονηρὸν (διαλογισµῶν τῶν πονηρῶν) καὶ πορνείαν, καὶ ὓβριν ἀπόστρεφον ἀπ’ ἐµοῦ. 8 ∆ειχθήτω µοι, δέσποτα, τὸ πνεῦµα τὸ ἅγιον, καὶ βουλὴν καὶ σοφίαν καὶ γνῶσιν καὶ ἰσχὺν δός µοι 9 Ποιῆσαι τὰ (τό) ἀρέσκοντά σοι καὶ εὑρεῖν χάριν ἐνώπιόν σου καὶ αἰνεῖν τοὺς λόγους σου µετ’ ἐµοῦ, κύριε 10 Καὶ µὴ κατισχυάτω µε πᾶς σατανᾶς πλανῆσαί µε ἀπὸ τῆς ὁδοῦ σου. 11 Καὶ ἐλέησόν µε καὶ προσάγαγέ µε εἶναι σου δοῦλος καὶ λατρεῦσαί σοι καλῶς. 12 Τεῖχος εἰρήνης σου γένεσθαι κύκλῳ µου, καί σκέπη σου τῆς δυναστείας σκεπασάτω µε ἀπὸ παντὸς κακοῦ. 7 Make far away from me, Lord, the unrighteous spirit, and evil reasoning [reasonings of evil] and sexual immorality, and pride turn away from me. 8 Let the holy spirit be shown to me, master, and give to me counsel and wisdom and knowledge and strength 9 To do the things pleasing to you and to find grace before you and to praise your words with me, Lord. 10 And do not let any satan rule over me to lead me astray from your path. 11 And have mercy on me and bring me near to be your slave and to serve you well. 12 May your wall of peace be around me and may your shelter of power shelter me from every evil.231

As it pertains to the evil spirit beings of the spirit world, the structure of this prayer is as follows: 7 Request for removal of the unrighteous spirit and its effects; 10 Request that no satan prevail over the writer; 12 Request for protection – God’s wall of peace and God’s power as shelter.

As stated above in Chapter 2, the petitioner’s request that God take the unrighteous spirit far from him suggests his recognition of God’s power to deal with the spirit world. Moreover, as also discussed in Chapter 2, the use of the phrase “any satan” to describe this spirit indicates that “demons were a threat” and 230

Ulrich Heckel (Kraft in Schwachheit: Untersuchungen zu 2. Kor 10–13, WUNT 56 [Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1993]) also proposes viewing Paul’s request to the Lord as prayer dialogue. However, he believes Paul’s request corresponds to the structure of a lament psalm (96–99). “Formgeschictlich handelt es sich bei der Erzählung in 2. Kor 12,7b–9a nicht um die Parodie eines Heilungswunders, sondern um einen Gebetsdialog, näherhin um die Erzählung eines Klagegebets mit göttlicher Antwort. Ihre Gliederung enspricht dem Aufbau eines Klagepsalms…” (96; emphasis his). For an even different view consult Betz, “Eine Christus-Aretalogie,” 288–305. 231 Michael E. Stone and Jonas C. Greenfield, “The Prayer of Levi,” JBL 112 (1993): 247–266; Greenfield, Stone, and Eshel, Aramaic Levi Document. Modified with respect to translation.

194

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

that “‘satan’ is a category of evil spirit and not a proper name.” 232 Here we add to these previous observations the significance for this writer of God’s peace as a wall and God’s power as shelter from every kind of evil, including satanic beings.233 That the petitioner recognizes God as the one who separates humans from evil is an important observation. This request echoes the earlier entreaty in which the author asks God to distance him from an unrighteous spirit. He ultimately acknowledges that God can protect him from every evil, including spirit beings but not limited to those alone. Paul’s request to God, albeit reported briefly, consists of content that contains structural similarities to the ALD. Paul reports that he asks God for the removal of this spirit being. Like the petitioner of this prayer, the apostle desires that this spirit leave him, which indicates his recognition of the existence of evil spirits and God’s power to handle them. Moreover, the domination of the angel of Satan over Paul is implied in the present tense of the verb κολαφίζω. Similar to the petitioner of this prayer, Paul asks God to intervene. In ALD, the writer asks God to let his shelter of power (καί σκέπη σου τῆς δυναστείας) shelter him. He views God’s power as a source of and dwelling place for protection. In Paul’s case, he does not relay such a request, but in 12:9 he reports the Lord’s promise of divine power, indicating that here too God’s power addresses the satanic. The verb ἐπισκηνόω means “to take up residence” or “to dwell.” Therefore, the Lord’s power dwells upon the apostle in his vulnerable state. Barnett observes that this word evokes the tabernacle in the OT when God pitches his tent among Israel. It is also used in John 1:14 to describe Jesus “tabernacling” or “pitching his tent” among humanity. By using this word Paul declares that Christ “‘pitches his tent’ with him in his weaknesses.”234 Like the petitioner in the ALD who believes God’s power affords shelter from evil, the apostle reports the importance of God’s power as a divine response to the presence of evil.235

232 Stone and Greenfield, “The Prayer of Levi,” 262; Greenfield, Stone, and Eshel, Aramaic Levi Document, 129–130. 233 Stone and Greenfield note that the formulas in this prayer “stand toward the head of the line of development of Jewish apotropaic prayers” (“The Prayer of Levi,” 264). Drawnel writes, “This line formulates a peculiar image of Levi being surrounded by a wall of peace and protected by the shelter of God’s might in order to be free from every evil. It suggests Levi’s total separation from evil as God’s work accompanied by the protection of God’s peace” (An Aramaic Wisdom Text, 218). Greenfield, Stone, and Eshel suggest a possible connection between the idea of sheltering in this prayer and the root ‫ סכ׳׳כ‬which occurs “in an apotropaic context” in Ps 91:4:‫באברתו יסך לך‬. 234 Barnett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 575. For a different view see Furnish, II Corinthians, 531. 235 Young and Ford capture this sentiment well in the latter part of their translation of 9b: “Gladly then will I take a pride in weaknesses, that the power of Christ may be pitched like a tent over me” (Meaning and Truth, 274; emphasis mine).

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

195

In another prayer, known as 11Q5 Column XIX (Plea for Deliverance), a similar request for divine rescue exists.236 Specifically in lines 15–16 the writer prays, ‫אל תשלט בי שטן ורוח טמאה מכאוב ויצר רע אל ירשו בעצמי‬ Do not let satan or unclean spirit rule over me; do not let pain and an evil inclination take possession of my bones.

This excerpt fits within the second part of the above prayer structure of the ALD. Like the petitioner in the ALD, the writer of this prayer asks God not to let a satan or unclean spirit rule over him. Similar to the ALD, the author uses satan and unclean spirit synonymously.237 Stuckenbruck observes the “functional equivalence here between ‘satan’ and ‘unclean spirit’” and that “‘satan here functions as a general designation for a demonic being whose activity is not subservient to YHWH.”238 In this prayer and in the Prayer of Levi, the writers acknowledge a similar characteristic of satanic beings: they desire to rule over the petitioner.239 In addition, here the petitioner includes a request regarding the ability of this spirit being to affect his flesh. Paul shares in this view that spirits affect the flesh, for the coming together of the spirit world and the fleshly world finds its locus in his body. Important to note is that both of these prayers seek refuge in God from evil spirits. The writers of these prayers view God as the one able to deal with this type of evil and to prevent its power from dominating them.

236

This prayer’s date ranges from 3rd to 2nd century BCE. Stuckenbruck, “Prayers of Deliverance,” 149; Armin Lange, “Considerations Concerning the ‘Spirit of Impurity’ in Zechariah 13:2” in Die Dämonen: Die Dämonologie der israelitisch-jüdischen und frühchristlichen Literatur im Kontext ihrer Umwelt, eds. Armin Lange, Hermann Lichtenberger and K. F. Diethard Römheld (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 2003). Lange believes that satan and the unclean spirit are two different types of demonic beings and not synonymous (260–1): “Thus, both ‘satan’ and ‘spirit of impurity’ describe different types of demonic beings by whom the praying person fears to be ruled” (261). 238 Stuckenbruck, “Prayers of Deliverance,” 149. 239 David Flusser notes the similarities between The Prayer of Levi and 11Q5 Plea for Deliverance in his seminal article “Qumran and Jewish Apotropaic Prayers” IEJ 16 (1966): 194–205. He argues that these two prayers contain one almost identical phrase and that these phrases are “midrashic paraphrases of Ps. 119:133b” (197). Instead of saying “Do not let iniquity rule over me” as is the case in the psalm, in both of these prayers the writers independently substitute satan for iniquity. Armin Lange, “Considerations,” offers a different view from Flusser, arguing that it is unlikely that the authors of these two prayers would independently substitute satan for iniquity. Instead, he posits literary dependence between the prayers with the Aramaic Levi Document dependent upon the Plea for Deliverance (261– 262); Cf. Stuckenbruck, “Prayers of Deliverance,” 152. 237

196

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

Jubilees 10:3–6 contains another prayer of deliverance which the writer ascribes to Noah, who prays for help against the evil spirits that afflict humanity after the flood.240 In v.3 he prays: 10:3 “God of the spirits which are in all animate beings – you who have shown kindness to me, saved me and my sons from the flood waters, and did not make me perish as you did to the people (meant for) destruction – because your mercy for me has been large and your kindness to me has been great: may your mercy be lifted over the children of your children; and may the wicked spirits not rule them in order to destroy them from the earth. 10:4 Now you bless me and my children so that we may increase, become numerous, and fill the earth. 10:5 You know how your Watchers, the fathers of these spirits, have acted during my lifetime. As for these spirits who have remained alive, imprison them and hold them captive in the place of judgment. May they not cause destruction among your servant’s sons, my God, for they are savage and were created for the purpose of destroying. 10:6 May they not rule the spirits of the living for you alone know their punishment; and may they not have power over the sons of the righteous from now and forevermore.”241

This prayer contains several of the same elements outlined in the previous prayers. The structure of this prayer can be demarcated as follows: Request for removal of the unrighteous spirits (v. 5) Request that these spirits not rule (vv. 3, 6) Request for protection (v.3) 242

Noah’s request for the removal of these spirits comes in v. 5 where he boldly gives God specifics on what to do with the evil spirits by asking God to imprison them, hold them captive, and take them to judgment. In addition, twice Noah asks God not to let the spirits rule or prevail (vv. 3, 6). In v. 6 he expands his request for his sons’ deliverance from these spirits to include the children of the righteous. This prayer differs from the ALD and 11Q5 in that he does not pray this prayer on behalf of himself but in behalf of his sons. His prayer also goes beyond his family because he includes the whole world.243 Noah’s prayer implicitly acknowledges the future possibility that evil spirits will continue to 240 James C. VanderKam, “The Demons in the Book of Jubilees,” in Die Dämonen: Die Dämonologie der Israelitisch-Jüdischen und Frühchristlichen Literatur im Kontext ihrer Umwelt, eds. Armin Lange, Hermann Lichtenberger and K. F. Diethard Römheld (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 2003) writes that Jubilees “is one of the earliest and most extensive retellings of the stories in Genesis and the first half of Exodus…. One of the themes in Jubilees that is not drawn entirely or even in large part from Genesis-Exodus is the writer’s teaching about angels and demons. Angels are, of course, mentioned in the scriptural stories (e.g., Gen 16:7), but Jubilees elaborates upon them in greater detail than do Genesis and Exodus. Demons, in contrast, are never mentioned in Genesis-Exodus yet they play a prominent role in Jubilees” (339). 241 VanderKam, Jubilees, 58–59. 242 For a more elaborate discussion of the prayer’s structure, see Stuckenbruck, “Prayers of Deliverance,” 155. 243 So Stuckenbruck who believes that Noah’s prayer is a prayer of protection for all righteous, even those that come after him (“Prayers of Deliverance,” 156).

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

197

plague the righteous. Consequently, he requests God’s protection for those who would come after him. This Noahic prayer shares with the ALD and 11Q5 the belief that evil spirits were a problem and that God alone could handle them. As indicated by Noah’s description, the evil spirits that he prays to be removed have similar characteristics to those described in the previous prayers. They destroy, cause corruption, and have a savage nature, and like the evil beings in the ALD and 11Q5, they desire to rule over humans. The writer of this Noahic prayer equates these beings with the violent offspring of the Watchers found in the Book of Watchers. Although these beings are bent on the destruction of Noah’s sons, he asks God to allow him and his children to increase upon the earth. Noah’s prayer highlights the difference between the nature of these spirits and God’s nature. The rule of these beings results in destruction, whereas God’s blessing brings prosperity. In v. 3 Noah begins his prayer by recognizing God as Lord of all the spirits and appeals to God to lift up divine mercy so that the children may not be affected by these evil beings. This recognition at the outset that God is the Lord of all spirits shapes the form of the following prayer. Noah’s acknowledgment of divine sovereignty over every spirit reveals God’s power to handle evil spirits as well.244 Interestingly, Noah’s request to God is “not addressed with finality.”245 Mastema also petitions God and asks that some of the evil spirits remain on earth to corrupt humanity, and he makes this proposal because “the evil of mankind is great (10:8).”246 Although Noah asks for complete removal of the evil spirits, God allows Mastema’s petition to stand.247 God relegates nine244 See also the prayer by Abram in Jubilees 12:20: “Save me from the power of the evil spirits who rule the thoughts of people’s minds. May they not mislead me from following you, my God. Do establish me and my posterity forever. May we not go astray from now until eternity (Vanderkam, Jubilees, 72).” Significantly, this prayer explicitly connects epistemology, cosmology, and anthropology. Humans have minds that can be affected by evil spirits. 245 Stuckenbruck, “Prayers of Deliverance,” 156. 246 VanderKam, Jubilees, 59. 247 VanderKam remarks about the request God grants Mastema. He states, “God’s response to Mastema’s self-serving request is truly surprising and presents the major puzzle regarding the demons in the Book of Jubilees…. For some reason the author has here departed dramatically from his source, the Book of Watchers, which says nothing about limiting the number of the demons or evil spirits” (“The Demons in the Book of Jubilees,” 344). And again, “The overwhelming power of evil connected with the angels and giants before the flood had been eliminated, but the full potential of supernatural evil remained through the demons, children of the watchers, who lived on after the flood. God reduced their power immensely when Noah prayed that he do so. The result was that sin was not of the same quality as before the deluge. It also was not removed from the earth, as would have happened perhaps if the satan had not been allowed to retain some of his agents. He apparently had a certain right to exercise his responsibilities before the judgment, and the Lord allowed him

198

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

tenths of the evil spirits to a place of judgment and shows Noah ways to address the attacks of the remaining one tenth of evil spirits. In a sense, then, God answers both Noah and Mastema. He removes a majority of the evil spirits but at the same time allows some of them to continue upon the earth. However, this allowance by God is only temporary. As Stuckenbruck observes, “God’s response to [Noah’s] petition ensures that from now on, the evil that is manifest on earth represents an essentially defeated power whose activity has already been contained.”248 God’s containment of some of the evil spirits underscores the limited nature of evil’s presence and foreshadows the final destruction of all of these beings. Moreover, it illustrates God’s rule over the spirit world and guarantees that eventually even Mastema will come to an end. 249 The apostle shares with the writer of this Noahic prayer a request to God for the removal of an evil being. He also shares a picture of evil beings as cruel and destructive. In addition, both of these petitioners do not receive the expected divine response, for God refuses to answer Noah’s and Paul’s requests for the removal of evil spirits. In both cases, God allows evil spirits to continue to afflict but provides the petitioner with a temporary remedy or way to endure the attacks. God provides Noah with herbal remedies (10:12) and grants Paul divine grace and power. God’s allowance of the angel’s continued harassment of Paul does not indicate that God has abandoned the apostle to the forces of evil. On the contrary, God assures Paul of the presence of divine power, which manifests in the midst of evil. God’s grace is enough, for it is God’s power acting on Paul’s behalf. Each of these prayers has one or more of the following elements: request for removal of the unrighteous spirit and its effects, request that no satan or evil being prevail, and request for protection. Similarities between Paul’s request and these prayers exist. The writers of these petitions recognize evil beings as posing a threat to their well-being, and so they pray for deliverance.250 Paul, like these authors, recognizes the inimical intent of his opponent and, more importantly, recognizes God’s power over Satan. In the same vein, Paul’s request to God echoes the perspective regarding evil and humanity found in these prayers. The apostle shares in the Gedankenklima of these petitioners who per-

to do this. However, he severely hedged him in and thus displayed a measure of grace, especially toward the chosen line from whom the demons were kept away” (362). 248 Stuckenbruck, “Prayers of Deliverance,” 156. 249 Lichtenberger states, “In the eschaton, God will destroy all negative powers (bad spirits, evil angels, demons, Belial, and Mastema) definitively. The present period, however, is the time of the reign of Belial, to whom in his inscrutable mystery God gives space and time for his reign” (“Qumran and the New Testament,” 121; emphasis his). 250 The similarities between 11Q5 and ALD may indicate literary dependence. See Stuckenbruck, “Prayers of Deliverance,” 152.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

199

ceive human beings as susceptible to the sway and power of evil spirits or entities.251 These supplicants recognize the need for God’s intervention to take away and/or remove these beings and such prayers call attention to the underlying conflict between God and Satan as well as humanity’s vulnerability in this conflict. At this point, observations by Hans Windisch on Paul’s prayer to the Lord deserve mention here, for he points out that Paul’s request for liberation from the satanic angel corresponds with gospel traditions, where a word from the Lord caused Satan and evil spirits to flee. He remarks that Paul probably wished the Lord would utter such a word on his behalf. Moreover, he observes that Christ leads the conflict against Satan and that Paul’s prayer mirrors prayers that the apostle no doubt prayed for others. He states: Wir werden an die evang. Versuchungsgeschichte erinnert, einerseits an das machtvolle ὕπαγε σατανᾶ Jesu Mt 410, anderseits den Bericht Mt 411 und Lk 413 … ὁ διάβολος ἀπέστη ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ ἄχρι καιροῦ, weiter lassen sich die Dämonenbeschwörungen der synopse vergleichen, man denke etwa an das ἔξελθε … ἐξ Mk 125 u. verwandte Worte. P. wünschte wohl, daß der Herr (abermals) solch ein Machtwort über den Satan ausspreche (etwa ἀπόστηθι ἀπ’ αὐτοῦ)…. Der Κύριος, an den sein Gebet sich richtete, ist also wohl Jesus: er ist auch für P. der Christus, der den Streit vor allem gegen den Teufel und seine Trabanten führt (vgl. Kol 215 1Kor 1524).252

Although Windisch ultimately views Paul’s request in terms of a request for healing, his insight that Paul’s prayer relates to the depiction of Jesus’s power over Satan in the gospels is helpful. Paul, like the gospel writers, takes part in traditions concerning a satanic figure who opposes and engages in conflict with Jesus. However, Satan’s power is subject to Jesus’s word and authority. Paul’s appeal to the Lord for removal of this satanic being illustrates the apostle’s recognition of this struggle between the Lord and Satan and Christ’s power over Satan. Windisch observes that Paul probably prayed to the Lord in the hope that the Lord would utter some powerful word to make the satanic being go away. This desire corresponds to the aim of other ancient prayers of deliverance examined above. For the apostle a λόγος τοῦ κυριοῦ in the form of a rebuke or an order to this satanic being would have been enough. 253 3.2.4.2 God’s Response The λόγος τοῦ κυριοῦ that Paul receives stresses the presence of divine grace and power, not the removal of the angelic being. In Paul’s account, God’s response that grace is enough in the face of satanic attack illustrates the human need for grace in relation to evil beings. Divine grace, along with power, becomes evidence of God’s protection and presence. The juxtaposition of the 251

The idea of Gedankenklima comes from Thierry, “Der Dorn im Fleische,” 305–307. Windisch, Der Zweite Korintherbrief, 388. 253 Matt 4:10, 11; Mk 1:25–27; cf. Zech 3:2. 252

200

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

terms “grace” and “power” implies that they are interchangeable.254 Here, God’s grace is God’s power working and doing what humans cannot do for themselves – addressing the attack of the satanic.255 Divine grace and power are manifested in the midst of human vulnerability and are revealed in the midst of demonic attack and obstruction.256 Grace, then, is God’s action, ability, authority, and power. The divine power for which the writers of the above prayers long for and petition God for, Paul declares is actualized in his own struggle. Paul’s weakness in his ascent account consists of his human susceptibility to satanic beings, which includes his inability to stop satanic attack and free himself from the enemy’s blows.257 Such weakness provides an opportunity for the “revelational reality” of God’s grace and power in conflict.258 Because of divine presence, the apostle experiences protection and sustainment in the midst of the angel’s actions. This entity does not succeed in obstructing the apostle since the Lord’s power and grace provides protection. Similar to the petitioners’ recognitions in the prayers above, the Lord’s response affirms humanity’s place in the cosmos. Humans are subject to the spirit world, but through God’s grace and power they can experience divine protection and assistance. The presence of Christ resting upon Paul assures him that although the angel of Satan attempts to stop him from ascending to receive more visions and revelations, the apostle is victorious through the power of God. These supernatural encounters, however, occur in the midst of combat. Although God does not

254 Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 863; Lambrecht, Second Corinthians, 203; Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 2:819. 255 Barnett writes, “There is a close association between ‘grace’ and ‘power,’ because (1) these words appear in synonymous parallelism in different parts of the couplet, and (2) the explanatory connective, ‘for’ links the two (‘my grace is sufficient, for [my] power…’). The grace that Christ displays toward his people is expressed in, and is inseparable from, his power. To be shown the one is to be given the other” (The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 573–574). 256 Harris, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 861. A number of translations have been offered for τελέω: “finds its consummation”; “attains perfection”; “is most fully seen”; “made fully present”; “realizes full potential”; “truly efficacious.” Barnett characterizes τελέω as power becoming a reality in weakness (The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 574). 257 This notion of human susceptibility to spiritual beings was discussed above in Chapter 2. Lichtenberger states, “The Qumran-Essene writings share with a broad stream of traditions in the ancient world, including the New Testament, the notion that humans are not masters of their own person and free in their decisions, but subject to reigning powers” (“Qumran and the New Testament,” 121). 258 Although this is the weakness focused upon in Paul’s ascent, when the apostle makes the statement in 12:10 “When I am weak, then I am strong,” he includes all of the foregoing weaknesses he has discussed, not just the weakness of human vulnerability that the ascent emphasizes.

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

201

remove the satanic angel, God does not allow the figure to obstruct Paul’s experiences. Just as God did not allow the earthly ruler to overtake Paul in 11:33, here also God does not allow a suprahuman ruler to impede Paul. The present tense of κολαφίζω indicates the relentless nature of Satan’s attempts, but Satan’s relentlessness is no match for God’s tabernacling presence. Through this letter, Paul reveals to the Corinthians the existence of the conflict between God and Satan and their own place in the struggle. He reminds them of Satan’s deceptive ways and his devices and, unmistakably, exposes the presence of Satan in their own congregation. At the same time, he declares to the Corinthians that Satan and Satan’s emissaries do not negate God’s presence in their midst, and he affirms that God is powerfully present among them (13:3). Moreover, he longs for them to embrace fellowship with the Holy Spirit (13:13), the Spirit they received in the past, and this desire implies that they should no longer continue to receive a different spirit (11:4). As a servant of God, who has the battle wounds to prove the existence of opposition, Paul also has the promise of the presence of divine power, which does not prevent opposition but manifests itself in the middle of opposition. Just as God does not abandon Paul in his confrontation with evil, Paul maintains that neither does God abandon the Corinthians. They too experience God’s presence, for God bestows divine grace and power upon them as well (13:3, 5). 3.2.4.3 Paul’s Boasting and Contentment in Weaknesses By using the plural “weaknesses” in v. 9, Paul discloses that it is not just the weakness he has described in his own ascent episode of which he can boast, but other weaknesses as well, which he lists in v. 10. They include insults, hardships, persecutions, and difficulties. This list briefly recapitulates the sufferings he delineates at the end of chapter 11.259 These afflictions, along with his experience of weakness during his ascent, become occasions for him to boast. Satake also underscores the significance of the singular form of “weakness” in v.9b and the plural form of the word in vv. 9c–10, stating: In V.9b, wo das Wort „Schwachheit“ im Singular steht, bezieht es sich dagegen in erster Linie auf die Stachelerfahrung. In V.9c ist also eine gewisse Erweiterung des Wortsinnes vorgenommen. Sie wird in V.10 durch die Zusammenstellung der „Schwachheiten“ mit der folgenden Vierergruppe noch klarer. Durch dieses Verfahren zeigt Paulus, dass er die Schwachheit, die er durch die Bedrängnisse in Ausübung der apostolischen Wirksamkeit erfährt, im Lichte der absoluten Schwachheit betrachtet, auf die er bei der Stachelerfahrung aufmerksam gemacht wurde. Er betrachtet also Schwachheit auf keinen Fall als seine Leistung. Der Satz erscheint so in Hinsicht auf seine Intention parallel zu 11,30, wo die

259

John Ashton (The Religion of Paul the Apostle [New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000]) translates ἀσθένεια as adversity and offers the following translation of 12:10: “For when I am weak [when I suffer setbacks], then I am strong” (118).

202

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

Bedrängnisse durch das Wort „Schwachheit“ ausgedrückt werden. Durch die Heranziehung der Stachelerfahrung wird sein Verständnis der Schwachheit ein Stück weit vertieft.260

Satake’s recognition that Paul experiences absolute weakness in his thorn encounter and then extends this view of weakness to his understanding of the afflictions in chapter 11 underscores the present argument in which Paul indeed links all of these afflictions under the reality of “weakness,” a reality that serves to bolster his presentation to the Corinthians. From the battlefield, Paul views his weaknesses and divine sustainment as pointing to a dual simultaneous existence in which the sharing of social space between human and divine, in this case Paul and Christ, designate a way of being that defies mere human epistemology, presenting a perspective from which reality has become reconfigured – power is made perfect in weakness. Notably, God’s power upon Paul does not spare him the experiences of any of these adversities (12:10) that he faces on account of Christ, but divine power assures him of God’s abiding presence. Similar to the presentation of his peristasis catalog in chapter 4, Paul poignantly portrays all that he endures on behalf of Christ and contends that his afflictions reflect Christ’s sufferings. Consequently, Paul can write that he is content in all such weaknesses because he knows that these are but momentary afflictions (4:17). The God who rescued him in the past will rescue him ultimately in the end (2 Cor 1:10; 13:4; cf. 1 Cor 15:51–58).261 Paul’s language in v. 10 brings together the man who was caught up to the third heaven, about whom he could boast, and his willingness to boast about his own weaknesses. As one caught up to the third heaven, Paul experienced the power of God at God’s initiative. He saw the Lord (12:1), was caught up to Paradise in the third heaven (12:2), and heard unspeakable words (12:4). About this person he could boast because to boast of this person’s experience is really to boast about God’s power and God’s work. On the other hand, this experience also underscores his weakness, his vulnerability to both satanic attack and to evil. The god of this age still wreaks havoc in the lives of unbelievers and believers alike, but Paul can also boast about this situation because it is due to this weakness that God’s power tabernacles upon him. He has learned that whenever he encounters attacks of the enemy and every time the enemy opposes him, these instances highlight the divine exchange between God and the 260

Akira Satake, “Schritt für Schritt: Die Argumentation des Paulus in 2Kor 10–13,” in Der Zweite Korintherbrief: Literarische Gestalt - historische Situation - theologische Argumentation. Festschrift zum 70. Geburtstag von Dietrich-Alex Koch, ed. Dieter Sänger, FRLANT 250 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2012), 294. 261 What Paul writes in 2 Cor 1:8b–10 appears in the background of Paul’s contentment in 12:10: “For we were so utterly, unbearably crushed that we despaired of life itself. Indeed, we felt that we had received the sentence of death so that we would rely not on ourselves but on God who raises the dead. He who rescued us from so deadly a peril will continue to rescue us; on him we have set our hope that he will rescue us again” (NRSV).

3.2 Interpreting the Passage

203

apostle. His weakness becomes simultaneously God’s vehicle of empowerment. 3.2.4.4 Summary and Conclusion of 12:8–10 Paul’s vulnerability to the angel of Satan’s attacks is a form of weakness, one that is highlighted and assumed by the writers of the ancient prayers discussed above. These authors recognize the inability of humans to deliver or protect themselves from any evil. Paul’s ineffectiveness against this suprahuman entity corresponds to such recognition and causes him to petition God for deliverance. Through this event the apostle continues to reveal important aspects of his cosmology and anthropology – humanity is weak and unable to free or deliver itself in the face of the satanic.262 Only God’s power suffices. By relating his visionary experience, Paul illustrates to the super-apostles and the Corinthians that true revelatory encounters highlight human weakness and, thereby, underscore the inconceivability of human boasting. His divine encounter reveals in the truest sense possible the weakness of human flesh in the present cosmic struggle, and this reality is part of the significance behind his heavenly journey. This understanding of Paul’s experience counters the position that the event is unimportant to him and to the Corinthians.263 For Paul, his rapture to the third heaven and his subsequent battle with the angel of Satan exposes the ongoing contest around divine knowledge and displays the power of God. Contrary to the common assumption that in Paul’s relating of this event he “gives the Corinthians a revelatory story without a revelation,” the apostle

262 In her discussion of this passage, Barbel Bosenius, Die Abwesenheit des Apostels als theologisches Programm: Der Zweite Korintherbrief als Beispiel für die Brieflichkeit der paulinischen Theologie (Tübingen: Francke, 1994), asserts that one of the reasons Paul shares this revelation is to underscore the transient nature of human existence. She writes, “Daß Paulus sein ganz persönliches Offenbarungserlebnis in einem Brief an die Gemeinde gleichsam öffentlich macht, dürfte seinen Grund zunächst einmal darin haben, daß die Antwort, welche er vom Herrn auf seine Bitte, er möge ihn von seinem Leiden befreien, erhalten hat, so allgemein gehalten ist, daß sie auch anderen eine Hilfe sein kann, wenn es darum geht, sich über den Sinn eines Grundphänomens der eigenen Existenz: der Vergänglichkeit, klar zu werden” (191). The present study argues that this revelatory encounter is about much more than the transitory nature of human beings. This confrontation between Paul and the angel of Satan exposes human vulnerability and the existence of a visceral struggle around access to divine knowledge. 263 Contra Furnish, II Corinthians, “Since he has not mentioned it to the Corinthians before now, he has probably never regarded it as an event of any great significance, at least for them” (544) and Gooder, Only the Third Heaven?, “While not averse to heavenly ascents and prophetic utterances, [Paul] no longer regards them as important within the new dispensation of Christ” (214).

204

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

calls attention to this event’s true revelatory purpose.264 The episode underscores the cosmic contest between God and Satan, the reality of this contest around knowledge of God, and humanity’s vulnerability in the fight. Moreover, Paul relates this experience rather than others because of its significance for understanding what it means to be God’s servant. True revelatory encounters by an apostle demonstrate that he is nothing (12:11) and that the power of God is everything (12:9; 13:4).

3.3 Paul’s Heavenly Journey: Real, Literary, or Both? 3.3 Paul’s Heavenly Journey

To discuss Paul’s heavenly journey raises the question of whether the apostle describes an actual ecstatic experience. This question, raised in relation to other ascent accounts, has been taken up, most notably by Martha Himmelfarb and Michael Stone. In her monograph, Ascent to Heaven in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses, Himmelfarb examines eight ascent apocalypses in which common themes emerge. These themes include the transformation of the visionary and the relationship between the seer’s metamorphosis and the portrayal of heaven as a temple. 265 In addition, Himmelfarb argues that apocalypses were responses to the perceived distance between humanity and the divine realm and that they illustrate the prevalent notion of the permeable boundary between the two spheres.266 At the end of her monograph, Himmelfarb concludes that the apocalypses are literary documents and do not relate real mystical experiences.267 The authors of these texts use conventional language to depict their experiences such as falling on their faces and becoming weak. 268 However, she admits that the presence of conventional language does not automatically eliminate the possibility of real events.269 Nevertheless, the fact that so many apocalypses contain similar language does impact her view of them. Moreover, these authors give first-person accounts of visions and heavenly journeys of ancient seers; they do not portray themselves as actual visionaries.270 The following quotes by

264

Barnett, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, 562. This is a common refrain echoed in various forms across several works. Cf. Baird, “Visions, Revelation, and Ministry,” 661; Garland, 2 Corinthians, 523; Lincoln, Paradise Now and Not Yet, 76; Matera, II Corinthians, 281. 265 Martha Himmelfarb, Ascent to Heaven in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 4; see especially 14–28 and chapter 2 of her work. 266 Ibid., 4, see especially 69–71. 267 Ibid., 98ff. 268 Ibid., 110. 269 Ibid., 111. 270 Ibid., 110, 113.

3.3 Paul’s Heavenly Journey

205

Himmelfarb sum up her view of the apocalypses. She writes, “In the apocalypses as a group the circumstances that gave rise to the visions relate not to the authors’ lives, but to the career of the pseudepigraphic hero. The messages of the visions are not personal but communal.”271 The apocalypses are “works of fiction from start to finish, although the authors themselves would never have accepted this anachronistic labeling of the genre in which they wrote.”272 The presence of pseudepigraphy plays a large role in her perspective. The writers of these texts depict their ancient heroes as visionaries, not themselves. Before Himmelfarb’s monograph appeared, Michael Stone had long argued that real experiences lay behind the visions and ascents of the apocalyptic seers. In 1974, Stone published an article entitled “Apocalyptic – Vision or Hallucination?” in which he asserts that pseudepigraphy was “simply an accepted mode in which the author wrote about a real and actual experience.”273 Furthermore, he suggests that the basis for pseudepigraphy may be that certain teachings were known to be taught by a particular ancient seer. The author, then, may use a specific seer’s name to report his own experience because the encounter connects to this seer’s teachings. 274 Stone acknowledges that this explanation does not suffice for every instance of apocalyptic pseudepigraphy but claims that it must have originated in this manner.275 Although these writings may contain “literary formulations,” a genuine practice of ecstasy forms the background.276 In a more recent article, Stone uses 4 Ezra to argue that the sophisticated psychological and ecstatic descriptions of the visionary’s experience and the profound transformation of Ezra’s perspective indicate either a personal incident or participation in communities where such encounters were known. 277 That writers use the language and expressions of their day and time, including pseudepigraphy, does not preclude the transmission of real divine episodes.278 271

Ibid., 113. Ibid; Cf. Himmelfarb, “Practice of Ascent.” 273 Michael E. Stone, “Apocalyptic – Vision or Hallucination?,” in Selected Studies in Pseudepigrapha and Apocrypha with Special Reference to the Armenian Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 1991), 421; originally printed in Milla wa-Milla 14 (1974): 47–56. 274 Ibid., 427. 275 Ibid. 276 Ibid., 428. 277 Michael E. Stone, “A Reconsideration of Apocalyptic Visions,” HTR 96:2 (2003), 177. 278 Ibid., 179. Regarding Enoch’s ascent and experience in the Book of Watchers (BW 14), John J. Collins, “A Throne in the Heavens: Apotheosis in pre-Christian Judaism” in Death, Ecstasy, and Other Worldly Journeys, eds. John J. Collins and Michael Fishbane (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995), raises the possibility that this ascent chronicles the author’s own journey. “The features of the scene that have no clear literary precedent invite the suggestion that the author was recording his own visionary experience in the name of Enoch. At the least, he knew the kinds of things visionaries do, and was 272

206

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

This discussion about genuine visionary experiences provides a fitting context for exploring Paul’s heavenly journey. It also offers an opportunity to examine how Paul’s ascent contributes to the conversation. After all, if we take Vermes’ charge seriously that we must not just view Jewish traditions as background for the New Testament but investigate how the New Testament actually shares such beliefs, then we must also ask how Paul’s own episode relates to the larger group of ascent apocalypses.279 By doing so, we explore the apostle’s contribution to the dialogue regarding the authenticity of divine encounters. As demonstrated in the present exploration, Paul does use terminology found in other ascent episodes, such as “visions and revelations” of the Lord, a reference to a number of heavens, and hearing “unspeakable” things. Yet couched among these “literary formulations” is language that indicates the genuine nature of this event for Paul. He gives a date for the occurrence, and he does not know whether this experience has taken place in or outside of his body. Paul’s inability to discern his actual state gives credibility to his account. The apostle also receives a thorn as a result of his extraordinary revelations. The presence of this thorn is a constant reminder of the authentic nature of the event. Furthermore, Paul relates his heavenly rapture to a community familiar with ecstatic experiences (1 Cor 12–14), an indication that visions and revelations of the Lord would have been assumed by his audience to be actual encounters. Significantly, Paul does not utilize pseudepigraphy to describe his excursion. Although some interpreters employ pseudepigraphy to explain his use of the third person and the phrase “man in Christ,” this explanation is probably unlikely. 280 Paul does not relate this experience in the name of an ancient seer. In fact, the apostle eventually reveals that he is the one who has journeyed to the third heaven. The epistolary setting of this recounting plays a role in the apostle’s use of the third person. After narrating his dramatic escape from an earthly ruler, he introduces visions and revelations of the Lord and a person who has experienced such things. In the public reading of this letter to the congregation, Paul keeps his audience in suspense regarding the person of whom he speaks. Is the person God raptures the same individual who has just escaped from Aretas’s ethnarch? Furthermore, Paul tells the experience not to boast about it but to underscore his weakness. Only when the episode reveals his weakness does he return to the first person (12:7). Paul’s change from first to apparently familiar with some techniques, such as incantation, which were not derived from the Hebrew scriptures. Even if 1 Enoch 14 is not a record of the author’s experience, it can still be taken as indirect evidence for the practice of ascent” (47). 279 Vermes, “Jewish Literature” 375. Himmelfarb, “Practice of Ascent,” does exactly this when she discusses the apostle’s supernatural experience. She rightly argues that Paul’s heavenly journey provides a different model for understanding ascents. The apostle’s excursion gives evidence for ascents as raptures, journeys taken at God’s initiative, not the visionary’s (128–133). 280 Segal, Paul the Convert, believes that Paul “adopts a pseudepigraphical stance” (58).

3.4 Bringing it All Together

207

third person and back to first person could be considered performative language. His shifting between persons mirrors his trip between the earthly and heavenly realms. The fluidity of his movement among earth and heaven parallels his free alternation between first and third and back. The apostle’s description of this event with both conventional language and language that indicates a genuine mystical journey may shed light on the wider discussion regarding the authentic nature of such experiences in ancient Judaism. Paul’s Entrückung illustrates that he inherits and takes part in larger traditions regarding ascents, since his portrayal of his journey includes imagery found in other ascent accounts. Significantly, however, his depiction also incorporates features that point to a real occurrence. Although Paul shapes the transmission of this event by leaving out details unimportant for his audience, his rendering of his experience reveals that the presence of common motifs along with a visionary’s ability to mold the recitation of a supernatural encounter does not preclude the reality of such an event. 281 The apostle highlights the part of the episode relevant for his understanding of a cosmic struggle and pertinent to his audience’s situation. As a result, Paul’s episode has both personal and communal significance.

3.4 Bringing it All Together: Paul’s Ascent, the War Scroll, the Treatise of the Two Spirits, 1QHa, and Prayers of Deliverance 3.4 Bringing it All Together

The foregoing examination of the War Scroll, The Treatise of the Two Spirits, and 1QHa shed light on Paul’s ascent experience. As noted previously, the War Scroll depicts an equal struggle between good and evil, with each side winning three battles. Collins’s observation regarding the significance of such a portrayal bears repeating here. Through this portrait, the writer reveals that “evil has a place in the constitution of the world,” is an “everpresent factor,” and “has a grip on the universe.”282 The earlier exploration of The Treatise of the Two Spirits highlighted what Collins calls the place of evil in the world’s constitution, for the Treatise asserts that God is the one who places the spirits of truth and unrighteousness within human beings and preordains the actions of the forces of good and evil. Good and evil are part of creation, at least until the end when God will vanquish all evil. In the discussion of 1QHa the connection 281 Paul does not use pseudepigraphy to narrate his account, but by omitting elaborate details regarding his journey he molds the depiction of his heavenly rapture. As Stone has argued, pseudepigraphy may have been one way ancient seers shaped the retelling of their own supernatural events. The tendency for visionaries to fashion the descriptions of their otherworldly encounters may not necessarily point to unreal occurrences. 282 John J. Collins, “The Mythology of Holy War in Daniel and the Qumran War Scroll: A Point of Transition in Jewish Apocalyptic,” VT 25 (1975): 608.

208

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

between epistemology, the spirit world, and human vulnerability to spirits as well as the necessity for divine intervention was underscored. Each of these documents exhibits a link between knowledge and the suprahuman world. In several instances, removal of spirits preceded the bestowal of divine insight. These texts also highlighted the recurring notion of evil spirits desiring to rule over human beings and humanity’s need for God’s assistance. These documents, along with the prayers of deliverance and the ascent texts that contain patterns of opposition, provide a glimpse into the complex world of traditions that form the presentation of the apostle’s ascent. Additionally, together with ascent texts that exhibit opposition to mystical journeys, the War Scroll, The Treatise of the Two Spirits, and 1QHa grant some insight into the appearance of the angel of Satan in Paul’s heavenly rapture. In these works (War Scroll, The Treatise of the Two Spirits, 1QHa), Satanic figures and spirits belonging to these figures afflict humans, oppose the righteous, and oppose God. Furthermore, in some of these texts once God removes or cleanses an evil spirit from a person, knowledge can take place. The implication behind these acts of catharsis is that divine understanding prevails only after human beings experience divine purification. As has been demonstrated, Paul’s depiction of Satan in this letter corresponds to the evil figures in these texts. Like the Angel of Darkness, Mastema, and Belial, Satan deceives, leads astray, causes suffering, and opposes knowledge of God. The portrait of Belial leading an army against God and the sons of light further coheres with Paul’s depiction of himself fighting alongside God against Satan and Satan’s angels and servants. The military imagery Paul employs to describe the battle brings the struggle to the forefront. Moreover, the notion found in these texts that evil has a place in the world provides a glimpse into God’s refusal to remove the apostle’s angel of Satan. Like other petitioners in prayers for deliverance, Paul prays regarding this evil being, yet God does not take away the angel. Similar to the state of affairs in the Treatise and in Jubilees, God allows the contest with evil to continue. Significantly, however, God gives Paul assistance just as God provides assistance to the sons of light in the Treatise and to Israel in the War Scroll. In the Treatise, the writer states that the God of Israel and the Angel of Light supply aid (3.24–25), and in the War Scroll God bestows mercy and protection upon Israel in the present conflict (14.9–11). In Paul’s case, God promises divine grace and power, enabling the apostle to withstand the enemy’s blows. Like the authors of these documents, Paul shares a view of the world in which the present time is a time of struggle and pain when evil is allowed to persist, albeit in a defeated state. Yet it is also a period where God’s presence of grace and power provides the righteous with support in combat. Remarkably, divine presence does not prevent or stop the cosmic struggle with evil, but it does provide the ability to endure and grants assurance of final victory.

3.4 Bringing it All Together

209

Unlike the passages in these texts where the removal of spirits is necessary before the impartation of some forms of divine knowledge, Paul’s ascent provides a different paradigm. God does not remove the obstructing angel but promises divine grace and power instead. 283 Indeed, the apostle describes God’s power as resting upon him or “tenting” over him, suggesting that God’s power endows him with the needed protection to endure the angel’s blows. For the apostle, visions and revelations of the Lord occur, but they take place in the heart of struggle and pain. They are enabled through God’s divine protection and happen in the midst of and in spite of human weakness and vulnerability. The complexity of traditions found within these texts also raises a question about the origin of the angel of Satan. Both the War Scroll and the Treatise contain passages in which God orchestrates the cosmic conflict, such as creating Belial in order to corrupt (War Scroll 13.11) or allotting to every person spirits of truth and unrighteousness (1QS 3.18–19). These texts do not exhibit any inhibition in ascribing to God evil as well as good. The question then arises as to whether or not these perspectives or traditions similar to these beliefs play a part in Paul’s depiction of the angel of Satan. As noted in the above discussion, interpreters have long assumed that δίδωµι in 2 Corinthians 12:7 is a divine passive; God gives Paul this angel of Satan. Such a viewpoint would cohere with some of these texts. However, Paul does not ascribe to such a perspective. While Paul’s language displays affinities with the connection between knowledge and the spirit world and themes of conflict in these texts, he does not suggest that God is the one who gives evil spirits to human beings. He also does not depict God as the source of evil or of the current contest. For instance, when Paul speaks of the Corinthians receiving a different spirit, he does not imply that God is the giver. Rather, he implies that Satan is the origin of this different spirit (2 Cor 11:3–4). Throughout his correspondence with the Corinthians, Paul portrays God as the giver of the Holy Spirit, not of evil spirits (1 Cor 2:9–13; 3:16–17; 12:3; 2 Cor 1:21–22; 5:5). When other documents do depict God as the one who gives evil spirits to human beings, they are created to corrupt (War Scroll 13.11) or given because man’s iniquity is already great (Jub 10:8). They are not given to keep humans humble or to remove pride, as has been argued in Paul’s case. The apostle paints a portrait for the Corinthians in which Satan and God appear on opposite, albeit unequal, poles of a spectrum. While Paul portrays 283 As discussed in the examination of 1QS 4.23–26, a person receives cleansing through a spirit of holiness and truth and subsequently acquires knowledge of good and evil. In 1QHa 11.21c–24 the writer speaks of being cleansed from a spirit of corruption prior to living forever with the spirits of knowledge. In these instances, the spirits exist internally and need to be removed by God’s action. Paul’s angel of Satan is not inside him but external to him. Nonetheless, his prayer indicates the assumption that removal of this entity is necessary for a successful ascent. God’s answer, however, shows that this is not the case. He can, and does, receive revelations due to God’s power overriding the angel’s presence.

210

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

God as in control and sovereign over Satan and satanic forces, he depicts the two as locked into combat with each other. The angel’s action against Paul is significant, for it strikes him, attempts to impede his progress in the ascent, and therefore endeavors to block access to knowledge of God. Paul may have believed God created the angel of Satan, since God is the creator of all things, and that God allowed it to afflict him. But these beliefs do not necessarily lead to the notion that God gives the angel of Satan to Paul, especially in light of how the apostle portrays the conflict up to this point. In other words, God’s allowance of the angel’s activity does not need to assume God’s bestowal. In Romans, Paul acknowledges the existence of angels and other created beings that attempt to separate believers from the love of God (8:35–39), but he does not state that God allots these angels to human beings or places these entities within people. The apostle concentrates on their actions of divorcing believers from God and declares the futility of such activities. Hence, for the apostle and the writers of these texts, evil beings and their plots fail in the end.

3.5 Excursus: Mithras Liturgy 3.5 Excursus: Mithras Liturgy

The examination above has involved primarily Jewish and Christian texts, although some Greco-Roman writers such as Plutarch have been included in the discussion. The Mithras Liturgy provides another window through which to view Paul’s characterization of his ascent as a dangerous journey. The title Mithras Liturgy, given to this document by Albrecht Dieterich in 1903, is understood by scholars as a misnomer.284 The text does not contain information known to be common in Mithraism such as the soul’s passage through seven spheres and Mithra’s role as guide to ascenders. 285 That this liturgy took place in the Mithras mysteries cannot be proven and is more than likely untrue. The work reveals a “private trip in a quest for oracular revelations, not a communal mystery rite, with special elaborations on a syncretistic background.”286 Furthermore, the Mithras Liturgy is part of a larger document called the Great Magical Papyrus of Paris, and little is known about its origin and provenance.287 The extant papyrus dates to the early 4th century CE, and estimates suggest that it took about 200 years for the document to come together. In addition, some older and younger sources exist in the text.288 284 Hans Dieter Betz, The Mithras Liturgy: Text, Translation, and Commentary. (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 2003), 5. Much of the following discussion is indebted to Betz’s work in this monograph. 285 Ibid., 2. These objections were made by Franz Cumont whom Betz cites. 286 Ibid., 5. 287 Ibid., 5–8. 288 Ibid., 9.

3.5 Excursus: Mithras Liturgy

211

According to Betz, the Liturgy reflects an “early or nascent Hermeticism of the first and second century CE,” and “its development took place in an Egyptian religious milieu under the influence of Hellenistic philosophy.”289 Nevertheless, he considers the cosmological worldview to be Greek rather than old Egyptian.290 For the purposes of this present investigation, three important sections which describe the person’s attempt to ascend and gain revelations appear in the liturgy. Included in this description are instructions about what to do when entering the divine realms and what one may encounter upon entering. The following excerpt describes what will happen after the person performs a breathing ritual. καὶ ὄψῃ σεαυτὸν ἀνακουφιζόµενον [κ]αὶ ὑπερβαίνοντα εἰς ὕψος, ὥστε σε δοκεῖ[ν µ]έσον τοῦ ἀέρος εἶναι. Οὐδενὸς δὲ ἀκούσει [ο]ὔτε ἀνθρώπου οὔτε ζῴου ἄλλ , οὐδὲ ὄψῃ οὐδὲν τῶν ἐπὶ γῆς θνητῶν ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ὥρᾳ, πάντα δὲ ὄψῃ ἀθάνατα. Ὄψῃ γὰρ ἐκείνης τῆες ἡµέρας καὶ τῆς ὥρας θείαν θέσιν, τοὺς πολεύοντας ἀναβαίνοντας εἰς οὐρανὸν θεούς, ἄλλους δὲ καταβαίνοντας. (lines 539–547b) [Then] you will see yourself being lifted up and ascending to the height, so that you seem to be in midair. You will hear nothing either of human or of another living being, nor in that hour will you see anything of mortal affairs on earth, but rather you will see all immortal things. For you will see the divine constellation on that day and hour, the presiding gods arising into heaven, and others setting (lines 540–547b).291

A few lines later a warning about trouble in the ascent occurs: Ὄψῃ {σὺ} δὲ ἀτενίζοντάς σοι τοὺς θεοὺς καὶ ἐπί σε ὁρµωµένους Σὺ δὲ εὐθέως ἐπίθες δεξιὸν δάκτυλον ἐπὶ τὸ στόµα καὶ λέγε· Σιγή, σιγή, σιγή, σύµβολον θεοῦ ζώντος ἀφθάρτου Φύλαξόν µε, σιγή...(lines 556–560b) And you will see the gods intently staring at you and rushing at you. But you at once put your right finger on your mouth and say: Silence! Silence! Silence! Symbol of the living imperishable god Guard me, Silence! (lines 556–560)292

After the person engages in a few more ritual actions, the following statements appear: 289

Ibid., 37. Ibid. 291 Greek text, line enumeration and translation come from Betz, Mithras Liturgy, 41, 51. 292 Ibid., 41, 52. Betz notes that some interpreters posit two backgrounds for the phrase “living God”: Egyptian or LXX. See footnote 347, pp. 148–149. 290

212

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

Καὶ τότε ὄψῃ τοὺς θεούς σοι εὐµενῶς ἐµβλέποντας καὶ µηκέτι ἐπί σε ὁρµωµένους, ἀλλὰ πορευοµένους ἐπὶ τὴν ἰδίαν τάξιν τῶν πραγµάτω(ν). Ὅταν οὖν ἴδῃς τὸν ἄνω κόσµον καθαρὸν καὶ δονούµενον καὶ µηδένα τῶν θεῶν ἢ ἀγγέλων ὁρ ώµενον, προσδόκα βροντῆς µεγάλης ἀκούσεσθαι κτύπον, ὥστε σε ἐκπλαγῆναι. Σὺ δὲ πάλιν λέγε· Σιγή, σιγή…(lines 565b–573b) And then you will see the gods looking graciously upon you and no longer rushing at you, but rather going about in their own order of affairs. Thus when you see that the world above is pure but agitated, and that none of the gods or angels is threatening you, expect a great crash of thunder to be heard, with the result that you are shocked. But you say again: “Silence! Silence! (lines 566–574).293

These excerpts refer to an ascent and to hostility encountered during the experience. In order to deal with the threat, the initiate engages in a protective ritual of putting his finger over his mouth, recitation of words, and prayer for protection. 294 The importance of the Mithras Liturgy for the present discussion lies in its recognition of the danger of ascents and the opposition one faces when entering the divine realms. Traversing the paths from earth to heaven and from heaven to earth can be fraught with threat and hostility. To address this reality, the initiate is warned about the impending danger and informed about what to do. Here, in this liturgy, the initiate prays for protection and performs some type of ritual. Paul, likewise, prays for protection and receives God’s divine grace and power. This brief exploration of the Mithras Liturgy illustrates the common motif of opposition in the divine realms and demonstrates that this theme exists outside of the Jewish and Christian texts examined in this section, thereby strengthening the plausibility that when Paul speaks of an angel of Satan that opposes him, he, too, speaks of opposition in the heavenly realm.295 Paul lives and moves in an environment with common conceptual ideas of the human being and its relationship to the suprahuman realm and supernatural knowledge.

293

Ibid., 41–2, 52. Ibid., 146–150; portions of the Mithras Liturgy are also cited by Furnish, II Corinthians, 543; Garland, 2 Corinthians, 509. 295 See also Betz, Mithras Liturgy, 146. 294

3.6 Snapshots of Chapter 13

213

3.6 Snapshots of Chapter 13:13:1–4, 13 3.6 Snapshots of Chapter 13

As argued above, the apostle connects the angel of Satan’s appearance to his revelatory experiences and perceives the angel’s actions as attempts to thwart any more revelations. He shares such an experience because of its parallels with the Corinthians’ own situation. Now that the Corinthians have heard the gospel and follow Christ, Satan appears, sending servants to deceive them and to throw them off course. As Satan opposes Paul’s revelatory encounters, he too opposes the Corinthians’ reception of the gospel. Yet Paul allows the Corinthians to hear the word of the Lord to him because it is the Lord’s word to them as well. Just as divine grace and power is with the apostle in his conflict with an angel of Satan, so too the Lord’s grace and power is with the Corinthians in their own struggle with the satanic emissaries. In 13:3 Paul affirms Christ’s powerful presence among them. Paul prepares the Corinthians for his third visit by warning them that he will not spare them or be lenient when he arrives (13:2).296 And although he has declared in 12:19 the divine nature of his speech, he recognizes the Corinthians’ demands for evidence that Christ speaks in him. He assures them that when he comes they will see this evidence by way of his refusal to be lenient toward them. 297 The last part of 13:3 is rather profound. Paul writes that “[Christ] is not weak toward/with you but powerful (δύναµις) among you.” Such a statement has several layers of meaning. First, Paul suggests to the Corinthians that since Christ is not weak toward them, neither will he be weak toward them when he arrives, for Christ’s strength will serve as a basis for his future strong action. Second, Paul implies that Christ’s presence remains among the Corinthians, despite what he has said earlier about the vices that are taking place in their midst (2 Cor 12:20–21), the intrusion of the false apostles who are servants of Satan (2 Cor 11:13–15), and those in the congregation who need to repent (2 Cor 12:21; 13:2). Extraordinarily, the apostle declares that, even in the midst of all the terrible things happening among the Corinthians, Christ δυνατεῖ ἐν ὑµῖν (13:3). In the apostle’s eyes, although satanic influence exists in the congregation, Christ is there as well. Such an assertion reflects Paul’s own experience. The manifestation of evil does not mean the absence of 296

See discussion of φείδοµαι and its military implications in 2.3.2 Christian Wolff recognizes the importance of Paul’s language of three witnesses as it pertains to his visits and to the Corinthian situation. He writes, “Der an die Dreizahl anknüpfende Rückgriff auf das alttestamentlich-judische Zeugenrecht von Deut. 19,15 … unterstreicht den Ernst der kommenden Visite: Dann wird eine endgültige Entscheidung fallen, so wie es geschieht, wenn der dritte Zeuge ausgesagt hat. Beim ersten Besuch hatte Paulus die Korinther zur Abkehr vom heidnischen Wesen veranlaßt (vgl. 1 Kor. 6,9–11); beim zweiten hatte er grobe Verstöße gebrandmarkt (12,21); vom dritten erwartet er eine tiefgreifende Reinigung” (Der Zweite Brief des Paulus an die Korinther, ThHK 8 [Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1989], 261). 297

214

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

God’s presence. Just as God’s power rests upon him in the presence of evil, so too does God’s power remain with the Corinthians. The observations of Christian Wolff deserve mention at this point: Paulus ist freilich davon überzeugt, daß Christus gerade durch ihn spricht, er ist ja sein Beauftrager; aber es ist der Gekreuzigte und Auferstandene, der sich durch Paulus hörbar macht; also erweist er seine Macht in der Schwachheit der apostolischen Verkündigung und dem gesamten Auftreten des Apostels (1,24; 5,20b; 12,12), auch den Korinthern gegenüber (εἰς ὑµᾶς, vgl. V. 4b). Sie haben das bei der Erstmission erfahren (vgl. 1. Kor. 2,1–5), und sie machen diese Erfahrung auch gegenwärtig (vgl. die Präsensformen in der zweiten Vershälfte), nämlich durch das Eingreifen des Paulus in ihre derzeitige Situation.298

The Corinthians will experience God’s power during Paul’s future visit and will be assured that Christ speaks through him. As Wolff points out, they experience Christ’s power through Paul’s intervention in their current situation. For Paul to intervene at this critical juncture is to engage in the process of divine interruption of the demonic. In the last part of verse 4 the apostle displays a sense of both the futuristic and present aspects of God’s power. Paul alludes to the resurrection with the future ζήσοµεν, “we will live,” but he also refers to the present manifestation of God’s power by writing that this power by which we will live in the future (ἀλλὰ ζήσοµεν σὺν αὐτῷ ἐκ δυνάµεως θεοῦ εἰς ὑµᾶς; 13:4) is even now at work among the Corinthians (εἰς ὑµᾶς). The same power that raised Jesus from the dead (καὶ γὰρ ἐσταυρώθη ἐξ ἀσθενείας, ἀλλὰ ζῇ ἐκ δυνάµεως θεοῦ; 13:4) makes Paul’s weapons efficacious (δυνατὰ τῷ θεῷ; 10:4) and shelters him from the enemy’s blows (ἵνα ἐπισκηνώσῃ ἐπ’ ἐµὲ ἡ δύναµις τοῦ Χριστοῦ; 12:9). This power will also manifest in his next visit. Again, Wolff: Der Apostel ist schwach »in Christus«, aber er wird sein Erfaßtsein von der lebenschaffenden Kraft Gottes, die ihm durch die Gemeinschaft mit Christus (σὺν Χριστῷ ist gegenwärtig zu verstehen) zuteil geworden ist, den Korinthern gegenüber erweisen, nämlich wenn er sie demnächst besucht und schonungslos alles aufdecken wird, was ihrem wahren Sein als christliche Gemeinde nicht entspricht, und ihr dadurch zu der ihr angemessenen Existenzweise verhelfen wird.299

The paradox of weakness and power in Paul’s existence showcases God’s might all the more. For the apostle, God’s power in the Christ event affects both present and future, both the apostle and the Corinthian communal life. In the closing verse of this letter, Paul prays that the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit will be with the Corinthians. Paul often closes his letters by mentioning God’s grace (e.g. 1 Cor 16:23; Gal 6:18), and in light of what has been previously stated about grace, Paul’s reference to it here in 13:13 recalls his earlier discussions of God’s χάρις. God’s power works on behalf of Paul and the Corinthians in the face of the satanic. Paul 298 299

Wolff, Der Zweite Brief des Paulus an die Korinther, 262. Ibid., 262–263.

3.6 Snapshots of Chapter 13

215

ends the letter by writing, “The fellowship (κοινωνία) of the Holy Spirit be with all of you.” The theme of fellowship (κοινωνία) appears elsewhere in the Corinthian correspondence. In 1 Corinthians 1:9 Paul tells the Corinthians that God has called them into fellowship with God’s Son, and in 1 Corinthians 10:16 he reminds them that when they partake in the Eucharist they actually fellowship with the blood and body of Christ. Similarly, in 2 Corinthians 6:14 Paul declares that light has no fellowship with darkness. Each of these instances denotes close relationship or close communion. In two other occurrences of this term, 2 Corinthians 8:4 and 2 Corinthians 9:13, it also has the connotation of participation or sharing in something. The Macedonians participate in the collection for the Jerusalem believers, and the Corinthians’ contribution to this collection allows them to become partakers who help the Jerusalem saints and other believers. The meaning in 13:13 also denotes intimate and deep communion, for Paul desires that the Holy Spirit will be close and powerfully present in the Corinthian congregation. 300 Both the subjective and objective genitive relay the apostle’s wish that the Holy Spirit’s own fellowship and presence be with the Corinthians and that this fellowship with the Spirit precipitate deep fellowship among believers there in Corinth. According to the apostle, communing with the Spirit brings about communion with each other. It is important to note that in none of the other undisputed Pauline letters does Paul include this phrase about the Holy Spirit’s fellowship in his closing remarks.301 The significance of the occurrence here becomes even more prominent when one examines the apostle’s wish in light of his previous reference to the Corinthians receiving a different spirit in 11:4 and his subsequent discussion of Satan in 11:13–15. His desire that the Holy Spirit be with them takes on great import in view of this larger context. His wish is that the Spirit, which they received in the past (11:4) and is the source of revelation (1 Cor 2:6–14), be present continually with them rather than the different spirit (11:4) that some currently accept. 302 When the Corinthians follow Paul and the gospel he 300 Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, raises the question of whether Paul invokes a blessing at this point in the letter or whether he makes a declaration. Based on Paul’s blessings elsewhere, she determines that the apostle here too engages in a blessing or wish for the Corinthian audience (2:916). Moreover, Thrall outlines the different forces of the genitives in this verse. Her view differs from the one presented here that the genitive in relation to the Holy Spirit is both objective and subjective. She believes that the genitive is objective and that “Paul wishes the Corinthians personal fellowship with the Spirit, in addition to experience of the grace of Christ and of the love of God. In each case what he has in mind is relationship with divine being” (2:919). 301 Although Paul mentions the fellowship of the Holy Spirit in Philippians 2:1, it is not a closing request on behalf of the Philippians that the Holy Spirit be with them as it is here for the Corinthians. 302 See also Martin, 2 Corinthians, 497. Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians, opposes this view, arguing that such usage would be “inappropriate, if the expanded conclusion is to be understood as in some sense a conciliatory gesture” (2:920). However, since this

216

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

preaches and reject the different gospel, the different spirit, and the false apostles, then true fellowship among the members of the congregation can take place. Thus, the apostle ends this letter with emphasis on God’s grace and the Spirit’s fellowship with the Corinthians. In doing so, he reminds them that through God’s grace and the Spirit’s presence they triumph over evil.

3.7 Paul Presents His Life as an Example 3.7 Paul Presents His Life

By relating his heavenly rapture, Paul provides the Corinthians with a glimpse into his own life in which he faces a satanic encounter. He shares with them the intent of the satanic entity and God’s promise to be with him in conflict. Throughout 2 Corinthians Paul provides his audience with testimonials about his life, sharing with them the trials and tribulations of an apostle’s journey (2 Cor 4:8–12; 6:4–10; 11:23–33; cf. 1 Cor 4:9–13). Likewise, this mystical event is an important presentation from Paul’s life, and he does not belittle it. Neither does he argue that it is only significant for him personally. Indeed, Paul embraces it, for it is through such an experience that he has learned about the sustaining presence of God. The idea that Paul would share an episode from his life that is theologically rich and significant is not a novel one when examining Pauline correspondence. In Galatians 1 and 2 Paul shares events from his life with the Galatians, and in these opening chapters he informs them of his call and how this call transformed him from one who followed the law to one who embodied the gospel.303 He relates to the Galatians how the report of his transformation spread: “The one who was previously persecuting us now preaches the faith which he was once trying to destroy” (1:23–24). Paul reports that they glorified God on account of me (1:23–24). In chapter 2, Paul gives an example from his own life when he faced opponents who advocated for a different gospel in which the law supplemented Christ’s salvific work. Paul rejects this view and indicates his refutation of this perspective by relating his dispute with Cephas. Paul declares to the Galatians that he has died to the law, he has been crucified with Christ, and that he desires the Galatians to follow in his footsteps by rejecting

statement is Paul’s wish for them, it does not seem out of place that he would desire the Spirit’s presence to be with them and not this other spirit which he perceives as working behind the false apostles. Throughout this letter he has mentioned evil forces and to do so here implicitly at the closing of the letter is not out of the question. Moreover, for Paul to conclude a letter forcefully or on a polemical note is not unprecedented. In Galatians the apostle includes in his closing remarks an adamant declaration “From now on, let no one make trouble for me! For I carry the marks of Jesus branded on my body” (6:17). 303 This has been well argued by Beverly Roberts Gaventa in her article “Galatians 1 and 2: Autobiography as Paradigm,” NovT 28 (1986): 309–326.

3.7 Paul Presents His Life

217

the Teachers who have come into their midst proclaiming a law-gospel.304 As Beverly Gaventa writes, “[Paul] sees in his experience a paradigm of the singularity of the gospel, and he uses his experience to call the Galatians into that singularity in their own faith-lives.”305 Paul shares incidents from his own life with the Galatians that reflect their current situation with the Teachers. Similarly, Paul conveys an experience to the Corinthians that reflects the events in their assembly, and once again uses an episode from his life to connect with his congregations. In both Galatians and Corinthians he draws upon his life story to illustrate the similar struggles between himself and his audience. Paul provides another glimpse into his life in Philippians 3:4–19. He begins the discussion by reporting his former life in Judaism and gives his credentials for being blameless under the law. Yet in 3:7 and following, he eloquently describes how everything he once had he now considers as less than nothing so that he may gain Christ. He declares that he forgets what lies behind him and presses forward to what is in front of him and then encourages the Philippians to do the same by holding fast to what they have heard (3:16) and to join in imitating him (3:17). Brian Dodd makes an important observation that this text is not just about imitation. He asserts that Paul is not merely showing how he imitates Christ so that the Philippians can imitate him in turn. Rather, the apostle emphasizes a divine encounter with Christ and how this encounter transformed his perspective.306 The following statement by Dodd about Paul’s transformation sums up the view well: “It is the adoration of Christ and the reminder of the power supplied by his resurrection for those who are ‘in Christ’ that enables their ethical response.… It is precisely because the Philippians, like Paul, are ‘in Christ’ and have his resurrection power available to them that they are able to think as Christ desires…”307 Philippians provides a salient example of Paul sharing an experience of a divine encounter with Christ and how this event affected him by transforming his view of his past, present, and future. These two examples demonstrate the apostle’s tendency to share glimpses of his life story with his respective audiences. He uses significant episodes from his life to reflect a common struggle with his hearers and/or to call them to some type of action. In a similar vein, Paul shares his ascent with the Corinthians to depict Satan as one who opposes knowledge of God. This is Satan’s strategy with the false apostles who have come into the Corinthian congregations. Paul, then, provides them with a testimony of his battle with evil and 304 The designation “Teachers” for Paul’s opponents in Galatia comes from J. Louis Martyn, Galatians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AB 33A [New York: Doubleday, 1997], 117–118. 305 Gaventa, “Galatians 1 and 2,” 318. 306 Brian Dodd, “The Story of Christ and the Imitation of Paul,” in Where Christology Began: Essays on Philippians 2, eds. Ralph P. Martin and Brian J. Dodd (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1998), 160. 307 Ibid.

218

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

shares with them an episode from his life that reflects their own situation. As he has come to rely upon God’s power in the presence of evil and opposition, so too should the Corinthians. That Paul divulges experiences from his life in the form of a letter is important for Barbel Bosenius. For her, Paul in his letter writing shows a connection between his proclamation in his epistles and the proclamation of the gospel content. Letters provide the means by which Paul can deal with theological difficulties in his congregations and clarify what it means to be a believer. She writes: Von der ‘Brieflichkeit der paulinischen Theologie’ zu sprechen – das sollen die folgenden Ausführungen zeigen – bedeutet somit: einen Zusammenhang zu erstellen zwischen der Verkündigungsform Brief und dem Verkündigungsinhalt Evangelium. Es soll deutlich werden, daß die Briefform für das Evangelium, so wie Paulus es versteht, das ideale Medium darstellt: In einem Brief kann der Apostel seine eigene existentielle Betroffenheit vom Christusereignis zum Ausdruck bringen, das Christsein an sich selbst verdeutlichen, und dennoch als Person hinter den ihm anvertrauten Verkündigungsinhalt zurücktreten. Indem er nur als briefliches Ich in Erscheinung tritt, werden die Rezipienten seiner Briefe dazu eingeladen, sich mit einem Modell christlichen Sich-selbst-Verstehens, nicht aber mit der Person des Apostels zu identifizieren, denn: Paulus will nicht sich selbst verkündigen, sondern Jesus Christus, den Herrn.308

Bosenius’ observations regarding the link between the gospel message and the proclamation in an epistle is important, as is her recognition that Paul emphasizes declaring Jesus as Lord, not himself. But her statement that Paul calls upon his hearers not to identify with his person but with an example of Christian self-understanding misses a critical point and in turn creates an unnecessary bifurcation between Paul and the putting forth of himself as an example. Paul does want his congregations to identify with him, which is what compels him to share incidents from his life that correlate to what is happening in their gatherings, as evidenced by Galatians, Philippians, and as has been argued in this study, 2 Corinthians 10–13. Paul makes a point to disclose to his audiences events from his life that correspond with their current issues. One could say that he identifies with them and then in turn expects the same of them. What is more, because Paul embodies the gospel of Christ by reflecting Christ’s sufferings in his adversities, to identify with Paul is ultimately to identify with the gospel message (e.g. 2 Cor 4:7–12).309

308

Bosenius, Die Abwesenheit des Apostels, 5–6. Regarding 2 Cor 4:10–12 Wolff, “Der Zweite Brief des Paulus an die Korinther,” states, “Der Apostel ist in Tod und Leben des Christus einbezogen. Paulus hatte dies in 4,10– 12 dargelegt…” (262). While I agree with this statement I would extend this passage further and begin with 4:8 where Paul delineates his sufferings on behalf of Christ. See the brief discussion of this in 2.8.5 above. 309

3.7 Paul Presents His Life

219

The perspective on Paul’s ascent argued for in this study differs from views commonly held by interpreters. Many assume that Paul tells his ascent in response to his opponents, the super-apostles. These super-apostles claim visions and revelations, and here Paul seeks to trump them by disclosing his trip all the way to the third heaven, so Paul merely defends himself when he relates this encounter. Reading the ascent in this manner, however, perpetuates the idea that this episode is unimportant and insignificant to Paul’s theological argument. It is only important as it relates to his defense and to the opponents’ bragging about their own visions and revelations. Moreover, it is far from certain that Paul responds to the visions and revelations of his opponents when he shares this episode.310 Whenever Paul compares himself to the super-apostles, he makes it obvious. For example, in 11:22–23 Paul asks a series of questions regarding his opponents and then responds that he is either equal to them or better. “Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they descendants of Abraham? So am I. Are they servants of Christ? I am talking like a crazy person---I am a better one” (11:22– 23). One would suspect that if Paul were comparing his own visions and revelations to those of his opponents that he would use a similar formula: “Do they have visions and revelations? I have more or better ones” or, at the very least, mention the comparison. Previously in the letter, he cites the charges against him. In 10:10–11 he writes, “One says, ‘his letters are weighty and strong, and his bodily presence is weak, and his speech is contemptible.’” If the charges against Paul include his lack of revelations, it would seem that Paul would mention it. For example, “Some say, he lacks visions and revelations…” Although Paul does not name his opponents, he has no hesitation in rehearsing their accusations against him or in naming explicitly how he is better than them. It follows from this discussion that to construe Paul’s ascent episode as one in which he has better revelations and visions than his opponents results in too narrow a framework for interpretation. That perspective does not tell the whole story of the narrative. Indeed, Paul prepares his audience for the satanic figure he introduces in 12:7 through the various points in his correspondence in which he has spoken about Satan and Satan’s devices. Paul completes this description of Satan with an episode from his own life in which he struggled with and faced satanic opposition and thereby testifies to the Corinthians about his experience 310

Wallace writes, “Paul never makes clear whether or not he is responding to a specific point of criticism leveled by his opponents, and he certainly never says whether or not the opponents themselves claimed to have visions. Indeed, even if we must conclude that Paul might prefer not to speak of such experiences publicly, the fact is, he did, and naming the experience’s personal significance for Paul brings us no closer to understanding its impact on his audience” (Snatched into Paradise, 22; emphasis his). Although Wallace and I differ regarding the reasons Paul discloses this event and differ in our understanding of its impact on his audience, we do share the view that this Erfahrung was more than personally significant to Paul. See discussion in 1.3.6.

220

Chapter 3: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10: An In-Depth Assessment

and about God’s power at work in the experience. Through his testimony regarding his encounter, he reminds the Corinthians that God does not abandon him or them in the conflict with evil.

3.8 Summary and Concluding Thoughts 3.8 Summary

The foregoing exploration of 2 Corinthians 12:1–10 has problematized current interpretations of this passage and offered an alternative reading. This analysis has highlighted Paul’s cosmic language in chapters 10–12, his battle imagery, and his language about Satan. As demonstrated above, Paul’s language is at home within the variety of concepts about Satan, angels, and evil spirits that were current in his larger socio-cultural context. In order to shed further light on this passage and to continue to problematize current interpretations of this pericope, this investigation incorporated a variety of ancient texts, focusing specifically on earthly descents and heavenly journeys, mystical experiences, images of Satan and evil beings, and prayers for deliverance. These ancient texts, which contain earthly descents and heavenly journeys, spirits and satans, and prayers for deliverance, demonstrate that the writers and readers of these texts participate in the belief that “human and spiritual beings share social space.”311 Moreover, they indicate confidence that God rules over the demonic world and belief that humanity’s rescue from these evil spirits rests solely upon God. Paul’s language suggests his participation in this “shared social space” between human and suprahuman and forefronts his involvement in the struggle that takes place within that space. Paul’s description of the thorn in the flesh as an angel of Satan (v.7) stresses the relationship between the satanic world and the human world – the connection between cosmology and anthropology. The role of this satanic entity in obstructing his ascent adds the element of epistemology to the interpenetration of anthropology and cosmology. This constellation of cosmology, epistemology, and anthropology appears in the Corinthian situation as well. According to Paul, his experience and the Corinthian situation illustrate that the cosmic world and the human being are inextricably linked, especially in relation to the gospel and the knowledge of God. The apostle’s cosmological assumptions behind the satanic figure of 12:7 became evident in the examination of his discussion of Satan, the god of this age, and Satan’s servants. Humanity is susceptible to satanic forces, and Paul is no exception. The passive form ἐδόθη does not necessarily indicate that God is the agent but rather highlights the vulnerability of human beings to cosmic forces. Paul was given this angel of Satan; he has no power or control over its

311

Stuckenbruck, “Prayers of Deliverance,” 163.

3.8 Summary

221

attack upon him, and so, this passive denotes that humanity’s place in the cosmos is affected and shaped by outside forces. Furthermore, Paul’s ascent continues his self-depiction as a mediator of divine revelation. As discussed in Chapter 2, Paul presents his sufferings as reflections of Christ’s sufferings and death with the apostle’s body embodying the gospel. In Paul’s Himmelsreise, his life remains a means of revelation, allowing the Corinthians to see and hear from him and his experience (12:6). His struggle with the satanic angel reveals the cosmic struggle around knowledge of God and, ultimately, reveals the real struggle taking place in the Corinthian congregation. Forces that oppose God also oppose humanity’s knowledge of God. Just as Paul allows the Corinthians to journey with him to the third heaven, he also allows them to hear the Lord’s words to him. They are words for the apostle as well as for the Corinthians. The gravitas of the perfect tense, “He has said,” in 12:9 is that the Lord’s assurances have continuing significance, for these words from the past have force in the present and in the future. Gräßer emphasizes the importance of the tense here as well. He comments, Die bleibende Bedeutung des mit dem Trostwort aus höchstem Munde Zugesagten wird durch die Perfektform eirȇken moi (»er hat zu mir gesagt«) zum Ausdruck gebracht, welche die »Dauer des Vollendeten« anzeigt…. Inhaltlich geht es dabei nicht – was vielfach übersehen wird…--um die passivisch formulierte Aufforderung »begnüge dich mit meiner Gnade!«, sondern um die aktivisch ausgedrückte Zusage: »genug ist für dich meine Gnade«…. Die Fähigkeit zum Ertragen seines Leides kommt Paulus gerade nicht mittels Selbstbeherrschung aus eigener Kraft zu. Sie ist vielmehr Folge einer fremden Macht, der ihm zugemessenen charis Christou.312

As Gräßer aptly points out, the perfect tense shows that God’s protection through divine grace and power happened for the apostle in the past, continues to happen for him in the present, and will occur for him in the future. Since Paul does not depict the struggle he engages in with the angel of Satan as something over and done, by means of the present tense of κολαφίζω, the need for God’s continued grace and power becomes evident, and the perfect tense of the divine words takes on particular significance. The apostle’s revelatory experiences happen in the heart of struggle, but the Trostwort assures him that he is not alone in the contest, for the God who raised the Lord Jesus will raise him up also (2 Cor 4:14; 13:4). What is more, the same power that enables him to endure all of the afflictions is at work among the Corinthians (13:3) and lies behind the apostle’s weapons in 10:3–6. God’s power assures victory in the cosmic conflict and ultimately wins over all opposition, both human and suprahuman.

312

Gräßer, Der Zweite Brief an die Korinther, 202–203 (italics original).

Chapter 4

Conclusions In his article “Principalities and Powers: The Cosmic Background of Paul’s Thought,” George H. C. MacGregor writes about the importance of “cosmic spirits” for understanding Paul’s thinking. He states, “We shall never get inside the mind of Paul until we take seriously what has in fact been ‘a neglected emphasis in New Testament Theology’, and cease to treat ‘as secondary and extraneous elements in the primitive Christian proclamation what in fact are integral and basic components of the Gospel.’”1 Since this statement by MacGregor appeared in 1954, a number of scholars have taken up his challenge as evidenced by the study in the previous pages. This present analysis adds to the conversation by investigating the notion of “cosmic spirits” in relation to 2 Corinthians 12:1–10, specifically the angel of Satan figure in 12:7. The preceding discussion presents Paul’s encounter in 2 Corinthians 12:1– 10 as a clash with the satanic in the framework of spiritual warfare. The apostle utilizes military imagery in 10:3–6 to depict himself in battle, and this depiction of contest and struggle continues in the following chapters and in the ascent account (12:1–10), where he gives the Corinthians a concrete example of his own conflict with evil. In several instances (2 Cor 4:4; 11:3–4, 13–15) he portrays for the Corinthians the conflict that takes place around knowledge of God. The false apostles who have infiltrated the Corinthian congregation are earthly counterparts to the satanic angel that Paul faces in the heavenly realms, and the apostle links their origin with that of the angelic being that attacks him. In each case, Satan’s primary objective is to oppose human insight into and from the divine. Paul attempts to broaden the Corinthians’ perspective so that they may see that their support of the false apostles involves more than adherence to eloquent speakers. In fact, their acceptance of these false apostles means they are really turning to a different gospel, receiving a different spirit, and ultimately following another Jesus. As discussed in Chapter 1 of this study, many interpreters view Paul’s ascent as part of a defensive framework, but this investigation has demonstrated that his heavenly journey is about much more than that. Paul’s recounting of his experience is integral to his theological argument and serves as an illustration

1 George H. C. MacGregor, “Principalities and Powers: The Cosmic Background of Paul’s Thought” NTS 1 (1954): 17 quoting J. S. Stewart.

224

Chapter 4: Conclusions

of the spiritual contest around the knowledge of God. This reading of Paul coheres with the apostle’s own words in 12:19 in which he states that with all he has expressed so far in the letter he is not defending himself. Yet as scholars have noted, Paul’s language in these chapters seems to indicate that he does set forth an apologia. Windisch raises the question, “Why does Paul not concede that he defends himself?”2 As Betz notes, Windisch raises the question but does not have an answer.3 The reading offered here suggests a solution. Although Paul recognizes that his arguments may be construed by the Corinthians as a defense, he rejects this way of reading his letter and maintains that his arguments go beyond a defense of his apostleship, for there is much more at stake.4 From the very beginning of chapter 10, Paul points to the cosmic nature of the conflict, and he attempts to show that the advent of the false apostles is connected to this cosmic context. Paul’s use of Genesis 1–3 and traditions surrounding it illustrates the ancient origins of this contest, and although Paul’s detractors make fun of his weak bodily appearance (2 Cor 10:10) and his speech (2 Cor 10:10), the apostle’s language reveals that he views the struggle as going beyond the fleshly realm. The battle is not merely about the false apostles but about the power that lies behind the false apostles. Humans have been caught up in this warfare, but the ultimate battle takes place beyond the human realm and within the heavenly sphere. The Geisterwelt impinges upon human existence, affecting both believers and unbelievers. The Pauline author of Ephesians understood well this view of the apostle, writing in 6:12: ὅτι οὐκ ἔστιν ἡµῖν ἡ πάλη πρὸς αἷµα καὶ σάρκα, ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὰς ἀρχάς, πρὸς τὰς ἐξουσίας, πρὸς τοὺς κοσµοκράτορας τοῦ σκότους τούτου, πρὸς τὰ πνευµατικὰ τῆς πονηρίας ἐν τοῖς ἐπουρανίοις. Chapter 2 provided a detailed discussion regarding the theme of suprahuman opposition to human knowledge of and from God in Jewish literature. In the examination of the War Scroll, The Treatise of the Two Spirits, 1QHa, and the Aramaic Levi Document, references to a cosmic conflict with suprahuman and human participants were explored along with the relationship between the spirit world and divine knowledge in these texts. Such writings illustrated the exist-

2

Hans Windisch, Der Zweite Korintherbrief (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1924), 406–407. 3 Hans Dieter Betz, Paul’s Apology, II Corinthans 10–13, and the Socratic Tradition, ed. Wilhelm H. Wuellner (Berkeley: The Center for Hermeneutical Studies in Hellenistic and Modern Culture, 2nd Colloquy on 5 December 1970, 1975), 2. 4 In her monograph, Letter Hermeneutics in 2 Corinthians: Studies in Literarkritik and Communication Theory (trans. Helen S. Heron [New York: T&T Clark, 2005]), Eve-Marie Becker asks the question: “How far is Paul an interpreter of his own letters, i.e. an interpreter of writing and understanding?” (27). Although Becker does not discuss this verse in detail, it provides an example of how Paul interprets his own letter and how he wishes his audience to interpret it as well.

Chapter 4: Conclusions

225

ence of links between the cosmological, the anthropological, and the epistemological. Paul’s emphasis on νόηµα and his repeated use of other cognitive terms in the context of opposition to knowledge of God forefront his perspective of an epistemic dimension in the present Corinthian conflict. Furthermore, this examination demonstrated that the Teacher in 1QHa presented himself as a revealer of divine knowledge and as God’s chosen instrument to disclose God’s truth. Similarly, Paul presents himself as a revealer, one chosen to embody the gospel and to carry it in his earthen vessel (2 Cor 4:7), revealing the power of God. Though he faces opposition from human and suprahuman forces, he is a general in God’s war in and for the world, and his own struggle with the satanic angel illustrates both the susceptibility of humans to external forces as well as the power of God in the face of evil. By sharing his testimony with the Corinthians of his battle and the presence of God’s grace in the ascent episode, he continues his role as a mediator of the gospel. The visionary who sees God and hears things unspeakable reveals to his audience the very real and concrete contest in which they, too, participate. Paul’s ascent episode serves a revelatory purpose to his audience and is therefore a significant encounter. The laconic description of the apostle’s ascent compared to other ascent narratives roughly contemporaneous with him derives from the apostle’s emphasis on the result of the experience, the cosmic clash that this encounter exposes. Paul does not need to divulge everything he sees or hears, only the details pertinent to the situation in Corinth as he perceives it. In Chapter 3, an investigation of a variety of texts that depicted patterns of opposition to divine revelation was undertaken and illustrated that Paul takes part in such traditions around opposition to divine knowledge. Indeed, his cultural encyclopedia includes the concept of spirits that facilitate and hinder knowledge of God. 5 Just as important as the recognition of this opposition is the view of human beings’ position in this opposition. Paul’s ascent, then, becomes another example of the hostility he highlights at the beginning of chapter 10. To be sure, the depiction of this struggle begins earlier in the letter (2 Cor 2:11; 4:4) but, nevertheless, it finds heightened expression with the sustained martial imagery in 10:3–6. In Chapters 2 and 3 of this study it was demonstrated that this military terminology continues in the remaining chapters, including in chapter 12 (2 Cor 12:7), which has not been sufficiently recognized. Paul’s use of σκόλοψ, a martial term, to depict his encounter with the angel of Satan illustrates that he perceives this experience through a military lens. Since Paul does not leave this imagery behind after 10:3–6, to view his ascent as another example of cosmic warfare full of obstruction and hardship, similar to the adversities he faces in chapter 11, is to

5 Umberto Eco, The Limits of Interpretation (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990), 266.

226

Chapter 4: Conclusions

perceive this experience as another important indicator of the degree of resistance he faces. The apostle’s ascent, therefore, provides an additional instance that falls within the notion of resistance to knowledge of God from the suprahuman realm. Examining Paul’s experience through the broader lens of opposition facilitated a review of earthly descents by angels, heavenly ascents by human beings, and the different ways the authors of these texts depict hostility to divine knowledge. The exploration showed that the picture of opposition occurs in a number of ways: satanic obstruction, instilling fear into the visionary, satanic anger at the visionary, and angelic attack. Paul’s language highlighting obstruction corresponds with the depiction of opposition in other texts, and his description fits within the socio-religious terrain of the time. The passives in his account denote both God’s action (ἁρπαγέντα; ὑπεραίρωµαι) and Satan’s action (ἐδόθη). Moreover, the investigation showed that ὑπεραίρω, αἴρω, and its cognates appear in other ascent texts, and so Paul is not alone in employing this terminology to describe being lifted up to heaven. In fact, Paul’s description aligns well with other ascent narratives of the period since his use of ὑπεραίρωµαι fits the cultural encyclopedia of the time. The identity of the thorn in the flesh has been discussed and debated for ages and no doubt will continue into the age to come. The explanation presented here contributes to this ongoing conversation and offers another way to view the apostle’s heavenly journey. The apostle encounters evil in the form of a satanic being who attempts to thwart his ascent, to hinder his attainment of revelation, and to harm him in the process. Nevertheless, this evil being does not succeed, and Paul’s ignominious encounter reveals that humans are vulnerable to spiritual forces and, as such, become participants in this conflict. The reality of this cosmic combat necessitates reliance upon God’s intervention and protection from evil spiritual forces as exhibited through prayers of deliverance. This study argued for the importance of viewing Paul’s request in 12:8 as part of the prayer of deliverance genre which became more common during this period. The structure of his request corresponds with that of other prayers of deliverance from demonic beings. The preceding analysis indicated that Paul utilizes contemporary terms and ideas from ascent and mystical traditions. Yet his account is uniquely his own, for while he participates in such traditions and uses their conventions to describe his experience, his description of his rapture cannot be limited to them. They shed light on the apostle’s encounter but do not tell the whole story of his heavenly journey because he has shaped the telling of the event to fit the Corinthian situation. The warfare that Paul describes in chapters 10–13 (cf. 4:4) is one that involves the mind, the body, the human, and the suprahuman and is one whose ultimate outcome belongs to God.

Chapter 4: Conclusions

227

The reading presented in this study can be characterized as apocalyptic – human and spiritual beings are sharing social space.6 Such an interpretation departs from traditional views of this passage, which range from depicting Paul as denigrating this experience, to regarding this expedition as of no value to Paul or the Corinthians, to assessing it as merely part of Paul’s defense. The present discussion has shown that Paul discloses this episode because of its rich implications for him and his audience. His own struggle with Satan provides insight into the Corinthians’ situation with the satanic emissaries. Moreover, he divulges what he learns from this experience and the divine word from the Lord to him in his struggle with evil becomes a divine word to the Corinthians in their own contest. Paul’s language illustrates the battle that surrounds the gospel proclamation with evil forces seeking to inhibit humans from hearing the gospel and from knowing about it (2 Cor 4:4), and even once the gospel is heard and accepted, deception can still take place (2 Cor 11:3). Yet although believers may face attack from human and suprahuman quarters, divine power remains a sustaining force. The apostle’s Himmelsreise reveals the faithfulness of God in the midst of evil and shows that God does not leave human beings alone in the battle; the Lord’s grace and power are present even when it seems that evil triumphs. As their father (2 Cor 11:2; 1 Cor 4:14–15), who found this to be the case in his own life, Paul reminds the Corinthians that Christ remains among them (2 Cor 13:3) and that they too can rely upon his presence. At the same time, it is important to note that Paul’s account reveals that the existence of suprahuman powers does not negate human agency in this struggle. Humans are not mere pawns in the battle between God and Satan. The conflict affects human beings, but they have the ability to act and resist evil through God’s power. Divine and human partnership exists in the proclamation of the gospel and in its embodiment as exhibited in the apostle’s depiction of himself as fighting alongside God to rescue every mind. Believers work together with God and with each other (2 Cor 6:1) to proclaim the divine message of reconciliation (2 Cor 5:19). Although forces of evil are at work in the world seeking to hurt, harm, and deceive, God is at work also, comforting (2 Cor 1:3– 5), preserving (2 Cor 4:7–11, 16) and engaging in battle in and for the κόσµος. The reading offered here opens up additional possibilities for future research such as examining the presence of military language in the rest of the letter, the function of prayer in this epistle, and the role of the Spirit in this correspondence. Other areas for further study include analyzing religious epistemology elsewhere in Paul’s letters including his presentation of himself as revealer, which, as indicated above, is similar to the Teacher’s presentation of himself in 1QHa. Moreover, the notions of evil, battle, and “already and not yet” which appear in the Jewish texts examined in this project warrant greater analysis in 6

See definition of apocalyptic/cosmic given in 1.5.2.

228

Chapter 4: Conclusions

relationship to Paul’s letters. It is hoped that the results of this work may serve as another basis for not only viewing Paul’s ascent through a different lens but also as part of the ongoing conversation regarding Pauline anthropology, cosmology, and epistemology, including the demonological framework utilized in his letters.

Bibliography Primary Sources Aeneas Taciticus, Asclepiodotus, and Onasander. Translated by the Illinois Greek Club. Loeb Classical Library. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1923. Aland, Barbara, Kurt Aland, Johannes Karavidopoulos, Carlo M. Martini, and Bruce M. Metzger, eds. Novum Testamentum Graece. 27th ed. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1993. Andersen, Francis I., trans. “2 Enoch.” Pages 91–221 in vol. 1 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. New York: Doubleday, 1983. Arrian. Translated by E. Iliff Robson. 2 vols. Loeb Classical Library. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1933. Betz, Hans Dieter. The Mithras Liturgy: Text, Translation, and Commentary. Studien und Texte zu Antike und Christentum 18. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 2003. Black, Matthew. ed. Apocalypsis Henochi Graece: Fragmenta Pseudepigraphorum Quae Supersunt Graeca. Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti Graece 3. Leiden: Brill, 1970. Cassius Dio. Roman History. Translated by Earnest Cary. 9 vols. Loeb Classical Library. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1914. Charlesworth, James H., ed. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha: Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments 1. New York: Doubleday, 1983. –. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha: Expansions of the “Old Testament” and Legends, Wisdom and Philosophical Literature, Prayers, Psalms and Odes, Fragments of Lost Judeo-Hellenistic Works 2. New York: Doubleday, 1985. Clement of Alexandria. Miscellanies. Pages 299–567 of vol. 2 of The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Revised and arranged by A. Cleveland Coxe. 1885–1896. 10 vols. Reprinted Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1986. Cyril of Jerusalem. Catechetical Lectures. Pages 1–183 of vol. 7 of The Nicene and PostNicene Fathers, Series 2. Translated by Edwin Hamilton Gifford. 1886–1900. 14 vols. Reprinted Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1983. –. “On the Mysteries 2.” Pages 181–183 in in Documents in Early Christian Thought. Edited by Maurice Wiles and Mark Santer. Translated by A. Piédagnal and P. Paris. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. The Dead Sea Scrolls: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek Texts with English Translations. Volume 2: Damascus Document, War Scroll, and Related Documents. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1995. De Jonge, Marinus and Johannes Tromp. The Life of Adam and Eve and Related Literature. Guides to Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha 4. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997. Dennis, George T. Three Byzantine Military Treatises. Corpus Fontium Historiae Byzantinae 25. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks, 1985.

230

Bibliography

Diodorus Siculus. The Library of History. Translated by Francis R. Walton et al. 12 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1967. Dionysius of Halicarnassus. The Roman Antiquities of Dionysius of Halicarnassus. Translated by Earnest Cary. 7 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1940. Duhaime, Jean. “War Scroll” Pages 80–95 in Damascus Document, War Scroll, and Related Documents. Vol. 2 of The Dead Sea Scrolls: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek Texts with English Translations.Edited by James H. Charlesworth. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1995. Greenfield, Jonas C., Michael E. Stone and Esther Eshel., eds. The Aramaic Levi Document, Edition, Translation, Commentary. Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha 19. Leiden: Brill, 2004. Herodotus. Translated by A. D. Godley. 4 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1966. Hollander, Harm W. and Marinus de Jonge. The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs: A Commentary. Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha 8. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1985. Holy Bible. The HarperCollins Study Bible: Fully Revised and Updated: New Revised Standard Version. Edited by Harold W. Attridge. New York: HarperCollins, 2006. Homer. Iliad, Books 1–12. Translated by A. T. Murray. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999. Horace. The Odes and Epodes. Translated by C. E. Bennett. New York: The Macmillan Co., 1914. John Chrysostom. Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistle to the Romans. In vol. 11 of The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers Series 1. Edited by Philip Schaff. 1886– 1889. 14 vols. Repr., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1956. –. The Homilies of S. John Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople, on the Epistles of St. Paul the Apostle to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon. A Library of Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, Anterior to the Division of the East and West. Translated by James Tweed. Oxford: John Henry Parker, 1843. –. The Homilies of S. John Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople, on the Second Epistle of the St. Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians. A Library of Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, Anterior to the Division of the East and West. Translated by J. Ashworth. Oxford: John Henry Parker, 1848. Johnson, Marshall D. “Life of Adam and Eve: A New Translation and Introduction.” Pages 249–295 in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha vol. 2. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. New York: Doubleday, 1985. Josephus. Antiquitates Judaicae. Translated by Henry St. J. Thackeray et al. 9 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998. Josephus. Bellum Judaicum. Translated by Henry St. J. Thackeray et al. 10 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926–1965. Knibb, Michael A. “Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah: A New Translation and Introduction.” Pages 143–176 in vol. 2 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. New York: Doubleday, 1983. Livy. Translated by B. O. Foster. 13 vols. Loeb Classical Library. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1924. Lucian. Translated by A. M. Harmon. 7 vols. Loeb Classical Library. New York: The Macmillian Co., 1940. Nickelsburg, George W. E. and James C. VanderKam. 1 Enoch: A New Translation. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2004.

Bibliography

231

Origen. “Against Celsus VIII, 73–5.” Pages 228–230 in Documents in Early Christian Thought. Edited by Maurice Wiles and Mark Santer. Translated by H. Chadwick. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. –. On First Principles. Translated by G.W. Butterworth. New York: Harper and Row, 1966. –. Prayer/Exhortation to Martyrdom. In vol. 19 of Ancient Christian Writers. Edited by Johannes Quasten and Joseph C. Plumpe. Translated by John J. O’Meara. Westminster: Newman, 1954. Parry, Donald and Emanuel Tov, eds. Dead Sea Scrolls Reader Part 1: Texts Concerned with Religious Law. Leiden: Brill, 2004. Philo. Translated by F. H. Colson et al. Loeb Classical Library. 10 vols. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1929–1962. Philostratus, Apollonius of Tyana, Volume 1: Life of Apollonius of Tyana, Books 1–4. Edited and translated by Christopher P. Jones. Loeb Classical Library 16. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2005. Plotinus. Enneads. Translated by A. H. Armstrong. 7 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988. Plutarch. Moralia. Translated by Philip H. De Lacy and Benedict Einarson. 16 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1959. Plutarch. Plutarch’s Lives. Translated by Bernadotte Perrin. 11 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1919. Polybius. The Histories of Polybius. Translated by W. R. Paton. 6 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2012. Rahlfs, Alfred, ed. Septuaginta. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1979. Rubinkiewicz, Ryszard. “Apocalypse of Abraham.” Pages 681–705 in vol. 1 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. New York: Doubleday, 1983. Saint Ambrose. Select Works and Letters. In vol. 10 of The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series 2. Translated by H. de Romestin. 1886–1900. 14 vols. Repr., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1983. Saint Gregory Nazianzus. Select Orations. Pages 187–498 of vol. 7 of The Nicene and PostNicene Fathers, Series 2. Translated by Charles Gordon Browne and James Edward Swallow. 1886–1990. 14 vols. Repr., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1983. Saint Hilary of Poitiers. On the Trinity. Pages 40–234 of vol. 9 of The Nicene and PostNicene Fathers, Series 2. Edited by W. Sanday. Translated by E. W. Watson and L. Pullan. 1886–1900. 14 vols. Repr., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1983. Sallust. Translated by J. C. Rolfe. Loeb Classical Library. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1921. Sanders, Ed P. “Testament of Abraham: Recension B.” Pages 871–902 in vol. 1 of The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. Edited by James H. Charlesworth. New York: Doubleday, 1983. Schuller, Eileen M. and Carol A. Newsom. The Hodayot (Thanksgiving Psalms): A Study Edition of 1QHa. Society of Biblical Literature: Early Judaism and its Literature 36. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2012. Stegemann, Hartmut with Eileen Schuller. 1QHodayota. Discoveries in the Judaean Desert XL. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. Stone, Michael E. and Jonas C. Greenfield. “The Prayer of Levi.” Journal of Biblical Literature 112 (1993): 247–266. Suetonius. Translated by J. C. Rolfe. 2 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1979.

232

Bibliography

Tertullian. Apologetic and Practical Treatises. Translated by C. Dodgson. A Library of Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, Anterior to the Division of the East and West. Oxford: John Henry Parker, 1842. –. “To Scapula 1–2.” Pages 226–228 in Documents in Early Christian Thought. Edited by Maurice Wiles and Mark Santer. Translated by E. Dekkers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. Tromp, Johannes. The Life of Adam and Eve in Greek: A Critical Edition. Pseudepigrapha Veteris Testamenti Graece 6. Leiden: Brill, 2005. VanderKam, James. The Book of Jubilees: A Critical Text. Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium, Scriptores Aethiopici 87. Lovanii: E. Peeters, 1989. Wiles, Maurice and Mark Santer, eds. Documents in Early Christian Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975. Xenophon of Athens. Hellenica, Books VI & VII; Anabasis, Books I–III. Translated by Carleton L. Brownson. Loeb Classical Library. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1921.

Secondary Sources Adams, Edward. Constructing the World: A Study in Paul's Cosmological Language. Studies of the New Testament and its World. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000. Alexander, Philip S. “‘Wrestling Against Wickedness in High Places’: Magic in the Worldview of the Qumran Community.” Pages 318–337 in The Scrolls and the Scriptures: Qumran Fifty Years After. Edited by Stanley E. Porter and Craig A. Evans. Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha. Supplement Series 26. Roehampton Institute London papers 3. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1997. –. “The Dualism of Heaven and Earth in Early Jewish Literature and its Implications.” Pages 169–185 in Light Against Darkness: Dualism in Ancient Mediterranean Religion and the Contemporary World. Edited by Armin Lange, Eric Meyers, and Randall Styers. Journal of Ancient Judaism Supplements 2. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010. Ashton, John. The Religion of Paul the Apostle. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000. Baird, William. 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians. Knox Preaching Guides. Edited by John H. Hayes. Atlanta: John Knox, 1980. –. “Visions, Revelation, and Ministry: Reflections on 2 Cor 12:1–5 and Gal 1:11–17.” Journal of Biblical Literature 104 (1985): 651–662. Barnett, Paul. “Paul, Apologist to the Corinthians.” Pages 313–326 in Paul and the Corinthians: Studies on a Community in Conflict: Essays in Honor of Margaret Thrall. Edited by Trevor J. Burke and J. Keith Elliott. Supplements to Novum Testamentum 109. Leiden: Brill, 2003. –. The Second Epistle to the Corinthians. The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997. Barré, Michael. “Qumran and the ‘Weakness’ of Paul.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 42 (1980): 216–227. Barrett, Charles K. The Second Epistle to the Corinthians. Harper’s New Testament Commentaries. New York: Harper & Row, 1973. Baur, Ferdinand C. Paul the Apostle of Jesus Christ: His Life and Works, His Epistles and Teachings. 2 vols. 1873–1875. Repr., Peabody: Hendrickson, 2003. Becker, Eve-Marie. Letter Hermeneutics in 2 Corinthians: Studies in Literarkritik and Communication Theory. Translated by Helen S. Heron. New York: T&T Clark, 2005.

Bibliography

233

Benoit, Pierre. “Pauline Angelology and Demonology: Reflections on the Designations of the Heavenly Powers and on the Origin of Angelic Evil according to Paul,” Religious Studies Bulletin 3 (1983): 1–18. Berg, Shane. “Religious Epistemologies in the Dead Sea Scrolls: The Heritage and Transformation of the Wisdom Tradition.” PhD diss., Yale University, 2008. –. “Sin’s Corruption of the Knowledge of God and the Law in Romans 1–8.” Pages 119– 138 in The Unrelenting God: God’s Action in Scripture: Essays in Honor of Beverly Roberts Gaventa. Edited by David J. Downs and Matthew L. Skinner. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2013. Berger, Peter. The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion. New York: Doubleday, 1967. Best, Ernest. Second Corinthians. Interpretation Bible Commentary. Atlanta: John Knox, 1987. Betz, Hans Dieter. Der Apostel Paulus und die sokratische Tradition: Eine exegetische Untersuchung zu seiner Apologie 2 Korinther 10–13. Beiträge zur Historischen Theologie 45. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1972. –. Eine Christus-Aretalogie bei Paulus (2 Kor 12,7–10).” Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 66 (1969): 288–305. –. Paul’s Apology, II Corinthians 10–13, and the Socratic Tradition. The Center for Hermeneutical Studies in Hellenistic and Modern Culture: Protocol of the Second Colloquy. Edited by Willhelm H. Wuellner. Berkeley: The Center for Hermeneutical Studies in Hellenistic and Modern Culture, 2nd Colloquy on 5 December 1970, 1975. Bietenhard, Hans. Die Himmlische Welt im Urchristentum und Spätjudentum. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen Neuen Testament 2. Tübingen: Mohr/Siebeck, 1951. Bosenius, Barbel. Die Abwesenheit des Apostels als Theologisches Programm: Der Zweite Korintherbrief als Beispiel für die Brieflichkeit der Paulinischen Theologie. Texte und Arbeiten zum Neutestamentlichen Zeitalter 11.Tübingen: Francke, 1994. Bousset, Wilhelm. “Die Himmelsreise der Seele.” Archiv für Religionswissenschaft 4 (1901): 136–169, 229–273. –. “Der Zweite Brief an die Korinther.” Pages 141–190 in vol. 2 of Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments Neu Übersetzt und für die Gegenwart Erklärt. Edited by J. Weiss. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1907. Bowens, Lisa. “Investigating the Apocalyptic Texture of Paul’s Martial Imagery in 2 Corinthians 4-6.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 39 (2016): 3-15. Brady, Dean. “Paul and Religious Experience.” Pages 471–490 in The Changing Face of Judaism, Christianity, and Other Greco-Roman Religions in Antiquity. Edited by Ian H. Henderson and Gerbern S. Oegema. Jüdischen Schriften aus Hellenistisch-Römischer Zeit 2. Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlaghaus, 2006. Brink, Laurie. “A General’s Exhortation to His Troops: Paul’s Military Rhetoric in 2 Cor 10:1–11.” Biblische Zeitschrift 49 (2005): 191–201; 50 (2006): 74–89. Brown, Alexandra. “The Gospel Takes Place: Paul’s Theology of Power-in-Weakness in 2 Corinthians.” Interpretation 52 (1998): 271–285. Bultmann, Rudolf. “New Testament and Mythology” Pages 1–44 in Kerygma and Myth: A Theological Debate. Edited by Hans Werner Bartsch. Translated by Reginald H. Fuller. London: SPCK, 1960. –. The Second Letter to the Corinthians. Edited by Erich Dinkler. Translated by Roy A. Harrisville. Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1976.

234

Bibliography

Calvin, John. The Second Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians and the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon. Calvin’s New Testament Commentaries 10. Edited by David W. Torrance and Thomas F. Torrance. Translated by T. A. Small. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1964. Carr, Wesley. Angels and Principalities: The Background, Meaning and Development of the Pauline Phrase hai archai kai hai exousiai. Monograph series Society for New Testament Studies 42. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. Clines, David J. A. “2 Corinthians.” Pages 1389–1414 in New International Bible Commentary. Edited by F. F. Bruce. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979. Collins, John J. The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic Literature. The Biblical Resource Series. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998. –. Daniel: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1994. –. “Genre, Ideology and Social Movements in Jewish Apocalypticism.” Pages 10–32 in Mysteries and Revelations: Apocalyptic Studies Since the Uppsala Colloquium. Edited by John J. Collins and James H. Charlesworth.Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Supplement Series 9. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1991. –. “The Mythology of Holy War in Daniel and the Qumran War Scroll: A Point of Transition in Jewish Apocalyptic.” Vetus Testamentum 25 (1975): 596–612. –. “A Throne in the Heavens: Apotheosis in Pre-Christian Judaism.” Pages 43–58 in Death, Ecstasy, and Other Worldly Journeys. Edited by John J. Collins and Michael Fishbane. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995. Davies, Philip R. “War of the Sons of Light against the Sons of Darkness” Pages 965–968 in vol. 2 of Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by Lawrence H. Schiffman and James C. VanderKam. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Davis, Basil. “The Meaning of PROEGRAPHE in Galatians 3:1.” New Testament Studies 45 (1999): 194–212. Dean-Otting, Mary. Heavenly Journeys: A Study of the Motif in Hellenistic Jewish Literature. Judentum und Umwelt 8. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1984. De Boer, Martinus C. “Paul and Apocalyptic Eschatology.” Pages 345–383 in vol. 1 of The Encyclopedia of Apocalypticism: The Origins of Apocalypticism in Judaism and Christianity. Edited by John J. Collins. New York: Continuum, 1998. –. The Defeat of Death: Apocalyptic Eschatology in 1 Corinthians 15 and Romans 5. Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 22. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1988. Dibelius, Martin. Die Geisterwelt im Glauben des Paulus. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1909. Dimant, Devorah. “Qumran Sectarian Literature.” Pages 483–550 in Jewish Writings of the Second Temple Period: Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, Qumran Sectarian Writings, Philo, Josephus. Edited by Michael E. Stone. The Literature of the Jewish People in the Period of the Second Temple and the Talmud 2. Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum 2. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984. Dodd, Brian. “The Story of Christ and the Imitation of Paul.” Pages 154–161 in Where Christology Began: Essays on Philippians 2. Edited by Ralph P. Martin and Brian J. Dodd. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1998. Donfried, Karl P. “Paul the Jew and the Dead Sea Scrolls.” Pages 721–733 in The Dead Sea Scrolls in Context: Integrating the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Study of Ancient Texts, Languages, and Cultures. Edited by Armin Lange, Emanuel Tov, and Matthias Weigold in association with Bennie H. Reynolds III. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 140. Leiden: Brill, 2011.

Bibliography

235

Drawnel, Henryk. An Aramaic Wisdom Text from Qumran: A New Interpretation of the Levi Document. Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism 86. Leiden: Brill, 2004. Duff, Paul. “Metaphor, Motif, and Meaning: The Rhetorical Strategy Behind the Image ‘Led in Triumph’ in 2 Cor 2:14.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 53 (1991): 79–92. Duling, Dennis C. “2 Corinthians 11:22: Historical Context, Rhetoric, and Ethnic Identity.” Pages 65–89 in The New Testament and Early Christian Literature in Greco-Roman Context: Studies in Honor of David E. Aune. Edited by John Fotopoulos. Supplements to Novum Testamentum 122. Leiden: Brill, 2006. Dunn, James D. G. Jesus and the Spirit: A Study of the Religious and Charismatic Experience of Jesus and the First Christians as Reflected in the New Testament. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1975. Eastman, Susan. “Ashes on the Frontal Lobe: Cognitive Dissonance and Cruciform Cognition in 2 Corinthians.” Pages 194–207 in The Unrelenting God: Essays on God’s Action in Scripture in Honor of Beverly Roberts Gaventa. Edited by David J. Downs and Matthew L. Skinner. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2013. –. Recovering Paul’s Mother Tongue: Language and Theology in Galatians. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007. Eco, Umberto. A Theory of Semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1976. –. The Limits of Interpretation. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990. Egan, Rory B. “Lexical Evidence on Two Pauline Passages.” Novum Testamentum 19 (1977): 34–62. Engberg-Pedersen, Troels. Cosmology and Self in the Apostle Paul: The Material Spirit. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Fitzgerald, John T. Cracks in an Earthen Vessel: An Examination of the Catalogues of Hardships in the Corinthian Correspondence. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 99. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988. –. Introduction and footnotes of “The Second Letter of Paul to the Corinthians” in The HarperCollins Study Bible: Fully Revised and Updated: New Revised Standard Version. Edited by Harold W. Attridge. New York: HarperCollins, 2006. Flusser, David. “Qumran and Jewish Apotropaic Prayers.” Israel Exploration Journal 16 (1966): 194–205. Frey, Jörg. “Different Patterns of Dualistic Thought in the Qumran Library: Reflections on their Background and History.” Pages 275–335 in Legal Texts and Legal Issues: Proceedings of the Second Meeting of the International Organization for Qumran Studies Cambridge 1995: Published in Honour of Joseph M. Baumgarten. Edited by Moshe Bernstein, Florentino Garcia Martinez and John Kampen. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 23. Leiden: Brill, 1997. Furnish, Victor P. II Corinthians. Anchor Bible 32A. New York: Doubleday, 1984. Garland, David E. 2 Corinthians. New American Commentary 29. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1999. Garrett, Susan R. “The God of This World and the Affliction of Paul.” Pages 99–117 in Greeks, Romans, and Christians: Essays in Honor of Abraham J. Malherbe. Edited by David L. Balch, Everett Ferguson, and Wayne Meeks. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990. –. “Paul’s Thorn and Cultural Models of Affliction.” Pages 82–99 in The Social World of the First Christians: Essays in Honor of Wayne Meeks. Edited by Michael L. White and Larry O. Yarbrough. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995. Gaventa, Beverly Roberts. “Galatians 1 and 2: Autobiography as Paradigm.” Novum Testamentum 28 (1986): 309–326.

236

Bibliography

–. “The Rhetoric of Violence and the God of Peace in Paul’s Letter to the Romans.” Pages 61–75 in Paul, John, and Apocalyptic Eschatology: Studies in Honour of Martinus C. de Boer. Edited by Jan Krans et al. Supplements to Novum Testamentum 149. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Georgi, Dieter. The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians: A Study of Religious Propaganda. Studies of the New Testament and Its World. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1986. Glancy, Jennifer A. “Boasting of Beatings (2 Corinthians 11:23–25).” Journal of Biblical Literature 123 (2004): 99–135. Gnilka, Joachim. “2 Cor 6:14–7:1 in the Light of the Qumran Texts and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.” Pages 48–68 in Paul and Qumran: Studies in New Testament Exegesis. Edited by Jerome Murphy-O’Connor. Chicago: Priory, 1968. Gooder, Paula. Only the Third Heaven?: 2 Corinthians 12:1–10 and Heavenly Ascent. London: T&T Clark, 2006. Goulder, Michael D. “Visions and Revelations of the Lord (2 Corinthians 12:1–10).” Pages 303–312 in Paul and the Corinthians: Studies on a Community in Conflict: Essays in Honor of Margaret Thrall. Edited by Trevor J. Burke and J. Keith Elliott. Supplements to Novum Testamentum 109. Leiden: Brill, 2003. Gräßer, Erich. Der Zweite Brief an die Korinther: Kapitel 8,1–13,13. Ökumenischer Taschenbuchkommentar zum Neuen Testament. 8/2. Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 2005. Hafemann, Scott J. Paul, Moses, and the History of Israel: The Letter/Spirit Contrast and the Argument from Scripture in 2 Corinthians 3. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 81. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1995. Halperin, David J. The Faces of the Chariot: Early Jewish Responses to Ezekiel’s Vision. Text und Studien zum Antiken Judentum 16. Tübingen: Mohr, 1988. Harris, Murray J. “2 Corinthians.” Pages 299–406 in vol. 10 of The Expositor’s Bible Commentary. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976. –. The Second Epistle to the Corinthian: A Commentary on the Greek Text. The New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005. Hawthorne, Gerald. Philippians. Word Biblical Commentary 43. Waco: Word, 1983. Hays, Richard B. The Letter to the Galatians. New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary 11. Nashville: Abingdon, 2000. Heckel, Ulrich. Kraft in Schwachheit: Untersuchungen zu 2. Kor 10–1. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament. 2/56. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr, 1993. Heger, Paul. “Another Look at Dualism in Qumran Writings.” Pages 39–101 in Dualism in Qumran. Edited Géza G. Xeravits. Library of Second Temple Studies 76. New York: T&T Clark, 2010. Heininger, Bernhard. Paulus als Visionär: Eine Religionsgeschichtliche Studie. Herders Biblische Studien 9. Freiburg: Herder, 1996. Hempel, Charlotte. “The Treatise on the Two Spirits and the Literary History of the Rule of the Community.” Pages 102–120 in Dualism in Qumran. Edited Géza G. Xeravits. Library of Second Temple Studies 76. New York: T&T Clark, 2010. Himmelfarb, Martha. Ascent to Heaven in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993. –. “The Practice of Ascent in the Ancient Mediterranean World.” Pages 123–137 in Death, Ecstasy, and Other Worldly Journeys. Edited by John J. Collins and Michael Fishbane. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995. Hooker, Morna D. “From God’s Faithfulness to Ours: Another Look at 2 Corinthians 1:17– 24.” Pages 233–240 in Paul and the Corinthians: Studies on a Community in Conflict:

Bibliography

237

Essays in Honor of Margaret Thrall. Edited by Trevor J. Burke and J. Keith Elliott. Supplements to Novum Testamentum 109. Leiden: Brill, 2003. –. “Interchange in Christ.” Journal of Theological Studies 21 (1971): 349–361. –. “Interchange in Christ and Ethics.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 25 (1985): 3–17. Jewett, Robert. Paul’s Anthropological Terms: A Study of Their Use in Conflict Settings. Arbeiten zur Geschichte des Antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 10. Leiden: Brill, 1971. –. Romans: A Commentary. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2006. Käsemann, Ernst. Die Legitimität des Apostels: Eine Untersuchung zu 2 Korinther 10–13. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1956. Reprinted from ZNW 41 (1942): 33–71. –. “On the Subject of Primitive Christian Apocalyptic.” Pages 108–137 in New Testament Questions of Today. The New Testament Library. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969. –. Perspectives on Paul. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971. Keener, Craig S. 1–2 Corinthians. New Cambridge Bible Commentary. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005. –. The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1993. Klauck, Hans Josef. 2. Korintherbrief. Neue Echter Bibel. Kommentar zum Neuen Testament mit der Einheitsübersetzung 8. Würzburg: Echter, 1988. Lambrecht, Jan. Second Corinthians. Sacra Pagina 8. Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1999. –. “Paul’s Appeal and the Obedience to Christ: The Line of Thought in 2 Corinthians 10, 1–6.” Biblica 77 (1996): 398–416. Lange, Armin. “Considerations Concerning the ‘Spirit of Impurity’ in Zechariah 13:2.” Pages 254–268 in Die Dämonen Demons: The Damonologie der israelitisch-judischen und frühchristlichen Literatur im Kontext ihrer Umwelt. Edited by Armin Lange, Hermann Lichtenberger, and K. F. Diethard Romheld. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003. –. Weisheit und Prädestination: Weisheitliche Urordnung und Prädestination den Textfunden von Qumran. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 18. Leiden: Brill, 1995. Leonhardt-Balzer, Jutta. “Evil, Dualism and Community: Who/What Did the YAḤAD Not Want to Be?.” Pages 121–147 in Dualism in Qumran. Edited by Géza G. Xeravits. Library of Second Temple Studies 76. New York: T&T Clark, 2010. Levison, John. Filled with the Spirit. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009. Lichtenberger, Hermann. “Qumran and the New Testament” in The Changing Face of Judaism, Christianity, and Other Greco-Roman Religions in Antiquity. Edited by Ian H. Henderson and Gerbern S. Oegema. Jüdischen Schriften aus Hellenistisch-Römischer Zeit 2. Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlaghaus, 2006. Liddell, Henry George and Robert Scott. A Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1888. Lincoln, Andrew. Paradise Now and Not Yet: Studies in the Role of the Heavenly Dimension in Paul’s Thought with Special Reference to His Eschatology. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 43. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. MacGregor, George H. C. “Principalities and Powers: The Cosmic Background of Paul’s Thought.” New Testament Studies 1 (1954): 17–28. Maier, Johann. “Das Gefährdungsmotiv bei der Himmelsreise in der Jüdischen Apokalyptik und ‘Gnosis.’” Kairos 5 (1963): 18–40.

238

Bibliography

Malherbe, Abraham. “Antisthenes and Odysseus, and Paul at War.” Harvard Theological Review 76 (1983): 143–73. –. “Through the Eye of the Needle: Simplicity or Singleness?” Restoration Quarterly 5 (1961): 119–129. Marshall, Peter. “A Metaphor of Social Shame: ΘΡΙΑΜΒΕΥΕΙΝ in 2 Cor. 2:14.” Novum Testamentum 25 (1983): 302–317. Martin, Ralph P. 2 Corinthians. Word Biblical Commentary 40. Waco: Word, 1985. Martyn, J. Louis. “The Daily Life of the Church in the War Between the Spirit and the Flesh.” Pages 251–266 in Theological Issues in the Letters of Paul. Nashville: Abingdon, 1997. –. “Epistemology at the Turn of the Ages” Pages 89–110 in Theological Issues in the Letters of Paul. Nashville: Abingdon, 1997. –. “From Paul to Flannery O’Connor with the Power of Grace.” Pages 279–297 in Theological Issues in the Letters of Paul. Nashville: Abingdon, 1997. –. Galatians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Anchor Bible 33A. New York: Doubleday, 1997. Maston, Jason. Divine and Human Agency in Second Temple Judaism and Paul: A Comparative Study. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament. 2/297. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010. Matera, Frank J. II Corinthians. New Testament Library. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2003. May, Herbert G. “Cosmological Reference in the Qumran Doctrine of the Two Spirits and in Old Testament Imagery.” Journal of Biblical Literature 82 (1963): 1–14. Meeks, Wayne. “Judaism, Hellenism, and the Birth of Christianity.” Pages 17–27 in Paul Beyond the Judaism/Hellenism Divide. Edited by Troels Engberg-Pedersen. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001. Menoud, Philippe H. “The Thorn in the Flesh and Satan’s Angel (2 Cor. 12.7).” Pages 19– 30 in Jesus Christ and the Faith: A Collection of Studies. Translated by Eunice M. Paul. Pittsburgh Theological Monograph Series18. Pittsburgh: Pickwick Press, 1978. Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. Freiburg: Freiburger Graphische Betriebe, 1994. Millard, Alan R. “Daniel.” Pages 847–870 in New International Bible Commentary. Edited by F. F. Bruce. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979. Mitchell, Margaret M. “The Corinthian Correspondence and the Birth of Pauline Hermeneutics.” Pages 17–54 in Paul and the Corinthians: Studies on a Community in Conflict: Essays in Honor of Margaret Thrall. Edited by Trevor J. Burke and J. Keith Elliott. Supplements to Novum Testamentum 109. Leiden: Brill, 2003. –. “Pauline Accommodation and ‘Condescension’ (συγκατάβασις): 1 Cor 9:19–23 and the History of Influence.” Pages 197–214 in Paul Beyond the Judaism/Hellenism Divide. Edited by Troels Engberg-Pedersen. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001. Montgomery, James. The Book of Daniel. International Critical Commentary 27. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1927. Morray-Jones, Christopher R. A. “Paradise Revisited (2 Cor 12:1–12): The Jewish Mystical Background of Paul’s Apostolate.” Harvard Theological Review 86 (1993): 177–217, 265–292. Mullins, Terence Y. “Paul’s Thorn in the Flesh.” Journal of Biblical Literature 76 (1957): 299–303. Murphy-O’Connor, Jerome. The Theology of the Second Letter to the Corinthians. New Testament Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.

Bibliography

239

Neusner, Jacob. “Anthropology and the Study of Talmudic Literature.” Pages 21–40 in Method and Meaning in Ancient Judaism. Brown Judaic Studies 10. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1979. Newsom, Carol. The Self as Symbolic Space: Constructing Identity and Community at Qumran. Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 52. Leiden: Brill, 2004. Nickelsburg, George W. E. 1 Enoch 1: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch Chapters 1– 36; 81–108. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001. –. “The Apocalyptic Construction of Reality in 1 Enoch.” Pages 51–64 in Mysteries and Revelations: Apocalyptic Studies Since the Uppsala Colloquium. Edited by John J. Collins and James H. Charlesworth. Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha Supplement Series 9. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1991. O’Collins, Gerald G. “Power Made Perfect in Weakness: 2 Cor 12:9–10.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 33 (1971): 528–37. Park, David M. “Paul’s ΣΚΟΛΟΨ ΤΗ ΣΑΡΚΙ: Thorn or Stake? (2 Cor XII 7).” Novum Testamentum 22 (1980): 179–183. Plummer, Alfred. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians. International Critical Commentary 34. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1915. Popović, Mladen. “Light and Darkness in the Treatise on the Two Spirits (1QS III 13–IV 26) and in 4Q186.” Pages 155–164 in Dualism in Qumran. Edited by Géza G. Xeravits. Library of Second Temple Studies 76. New York: T&T Clark, 2010. Porter, Stanley E. “Reconciliation and 2 Cor 5, 18–21.” Pages 693–705 in The Corinthian Correspondence. Edited by R. Bieringer. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 125. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1996. Price, Robert M. “Punished in Paradise: An Exegetical Theory on 2 Corinthians 12:1–10.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 7 (1980): 33–40. Reitzenstein, Richard. Hellenistic Mystery-Religions: Their Basic Ideas and Significance. Translated by J. E. Steely. Pittsburgh Theological Seminary Monograph Series 15. Pittsburgh: Pickwick, 1978. Rienecker, Fritz, trans. A Linguistic Key to the Greek New Testament: Volume 1 Matthew through Acts. Edited by Cleon L. Rogers, Jr. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976. Roetzel, Calvin J. “The Language of War (2 Cor. 10:1–6) and the Language of Weakness (2 Cor. 11:21b–13:10).” Biblical Interpretation 17 (2009): 77–99. Rowland, Christopher. The Open Heaven: A Study of Apocalyptic in Judaism and Early Christianity. New York: Crossroad, 1982. Saake, Helmut. “Paulus als Ekstatiker: Pneumatologische Beobachtungen zu 2 Kor. 12:1– 10.” Novum Testamentum 15 (1973): 153–160. Sampley, J. Paul. Second Letter to the Corinthians. New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary 11. Nashville: Abingdon, 2000. Satake, Akira. “Schritt für Schritt: Die Argumentation des Paulus in 2Kor 10–13” in Der Zweite Korintherbrief: Literarische Gestalt - historische Situation - theologische Argumentation. Festschrift zum 70. Geburtstag von Dietrich-Alex Koch. Edited by Dieter Sänger. Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 250. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2012. Schäfer, Peter. “New Testament and Hekhalot Literature” in Hekhalot-Studien. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1988. –. “New Testament and Hekhalot Literature: The Journey into Heaven in Paul and in Merkavah Mysticism” Journal of Jewish Studies 35 (1984): 19–35. –. Synopse zur Hekhalot-Literatur. Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum 2. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1981.

240

Bibliography

Schmeller, Thomas. Der Zweite Brief an die Korinther: (2Kor 7,5–13,13). EvangelischKatholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament 8. 2 vols. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchen Verlag, 2015. Schmithals, Walter. Gnosticism in Corinth: An Investigation of the Letters to the Corinthians. Translated by John E. Steely. Nashville: Abingdon, 1971. Schnelle, Udo. “Der 2. Korintherbrief und die Mission gegen Paulus” in Der Zweite Korintherbrief: Literarische Gestalt – historische Situation – theologische Argumentation. Festschrift zum 70. Geburtstag von Dietrich-Alex Koch. Edited by Dieter Sänger. Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 250. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2012. Scholem, Gershom G. Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism, and Talmudic Tradition. 2nd ed. New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1965. –. Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism. Jerusalem: Schocken, 1941. Schütz, John Howard. Paul and the Anatomy of Apostolic Authority. The New Testament Library. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2007. Schweitzer, Albert. The Mysticism of Paul the Apostle. Translated by William Montgomery. The Albert Schweitzer Library. London: A. & C. Black, 1931. Repr. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998. Scott, James. “Throne-Chariot Mysticism in Qumran and in Paul” Pages 101–119 in Eschatology, Messianism, and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by Craig Evans and Peter Flint. Studies in the BSS and Related Literature. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997. Segal, Alan F. “Paul and the Beginning of Jewish Mysticism.” Pages 95–122 in Death, Ecstasy, and Other Worldly Journeys. Edited by John J. Collins and Michael Fishbane. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1995. –. Paul the Convert: The Apostolate and Apostasy of Saul the Pharisee. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990. Sekki, Arthur Everett. The Meaning of RUAḤ at Qumran. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 110. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987. Smith, Morton. “Ascent to the Heavens and the Beginning of Christianity.” Eranos-Jahrbuch 50 (1981): 403–429. –. “Ascent to the Heavens and Deification in 4QMa.” Pages 181–188 in Archaeology and History in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha: Supplement Series 8. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1990. Smith-Christopher, Daniel L. The Book of Daniel. New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary 7. Nashville: Abingdon, 1994. Soskice, Janet. Metaphor and Religious Language. Oxford: Clarendon, 1985. Stone, Michael E. “Apocalyptic – Vision or Hallucination?” Pages 419–428 in Selected Studies in Pseudepigrapha and Apocrypha with Special Reference to the Armenian Tradition. Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha 9. Leiden: Brill, 1991. Originally printed in Milla wa-Milla 14 (1974): 47–56. –. “A Reconsideration of Apocalyptic Visions.” Harvard Theological Review 96:2 (2003): 167–180. Stuckenbruck, Loren T. “The Book of Jubilees and the Origin of Evil.” Pages 284–308 in Enoch and the Mosaic Torah. Edited by Gabriele Boccaccini and Giovanni Ibba. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009. –. “The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament.” Pages 131–170 in Qumran and the Bible: Studying the Jewish and Christian Scriptures in light of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Edited by Nóra Dávid and Armin Lange. Contributions to Biblical Exegesis and Theo-logy 57. Leuven: Peeters, 2010.

Bibliography

241

–. “Demonic Beings and the Dead Sea Scrolls.” Pages 121–144 in Definitions and Development. Vol. 1 of Explaining Evil. Edited by J. Harold Ellens. Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality. Santa Barbara: Praeger, 2011. –. “Giant Mythology and Demonology: From the Ancient Near East to the Dead Sea Scrolls.” Pages 318–338 in Die Dämonen Demons: The Damonologie der israelitischjudischen und frühchristlichen Literatur im Kontext ihrer Umwelt. Edited by Armin Lange, Hermann Lichtenberger and K. F. Diethard Romheld. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003. –. “The Human Being and Demonic Invasion: Therapeutic Models in Ancient Jewish and Christian Texts.” Pages 94–123 in Spirituality, Theology, and Mental Health: Multidisciplinary Perspectives. Edited by Christopher C. H. Cook. London: SCM, 2013. –. “The Interiorization of Dualism within the Human Being in Second Temple Judaism: The Treatise of the Two Spirits (1QS III:13–IV:26) in its Tradition-Historical Context.” Pages 145–168 in Light Against Darkness: Dualism in Ancient Mediterranean Religion and the Contemporary World. Edited by Armin Lange, Eric Meyers, and Randall Styers. Journal of Ancient Judaism Supplements 2. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010. –. “Jesus’ Apocalyptic Worldview and His Exorcistic Ministry.” Pages 68–84 in The Pseudepigrapha and Christian Origins: Essays from the Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas. Edited by Gerbern S. Oegema and James H. Charlesworth. Jewish and Christian Texts in Contexts and Related Studies 4. New York: T&T Clark, 2008. –. “The Origins of Evil in Jewish Apocalyptic Tradition: The Interpretation of Genesis 6:1– 4 in the Second and Third Centuries B.C.E.” Pages 87–118 in The Fall of the Angels. Edited by Christoph Auffarth and Loren T. Stuckenbruck.Themes in Biblical Narrative 6. Leiden: Brill, 2004. –. “Prayers of Deliverance from the Demonic in the Dead Sea Scrolls and Related Early Jewish Literature.” Pages 146–165 in The Changing Face of Judaism, Christianity, and Other Greco-Roman Religions in Antiquity. Edited by Ian H. Henderson and Gerbern S. Oegema. Jüdische Schriften aus Hellenistisch-Römischer Zeit 2. Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlaghaus, 2006. –. “Why Should Women Cover Their Heads Because of Angels?” (1 Corinthians 11:10).” Stone-Campbell Journal 4 (2001): 205–234. Sumney, Jerry. “Paul’s ‘Weakness’: An Integral Part of His Conception of Apostleship.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 52 (1993): 71–91. –. “The Role of Historical Reconstructions of Early Christianity in Identifying Paul’s Opponents” Perspectives in Religious Studies 16 (1989): 45–53. Tabor, James D. Things Unutterable: Paul’s Ascent to Paradise in its Greco-Roman, Judaic, and Early Christian Contexts. Studies in Judaism. Lanham: University Press of America, 1986. Thierry, Johannes J. “Der Dorn im Fleische (2 Κοr. 12:7–8).” Novum Testamentum 5 (1962): 301–310. Thrall, Margaret E. “Paul’s Journey to Paradise: Some Exegetical Issues in 2 Cor 12, 2–4.” Pages 347–363 in The Corinthian Correspondence. Edited by R. Bieringer. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 125. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1996. –. The Second Epistle to the Corinthians. International Critical Commentary 47. 2 vols. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000. Tronier, Henrik. “The Corinthian Correspondence between Philosophical Idealism and Apocalypticism.” Pages 165–196 in Paul Beyond the Judaism/Hellenism Divide. Edited by Troels Engberg-Pedersen. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2001.

242

Bibliography

VanderKam, James. “The Demons in the Book of Jubilees.” Pages 339–364 in Die Dämonen Demons: Die Dämonologie der Israelitisch-Jüdischen und Frühchristlichen Literatur im Kontext ihrer Umwelt. Edited by Armin Lange, Hermann Lichtenberger and K.F. Diethard Römheld. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 2003. Vermes, Geza. “Jewish Literature and New Testament Exegesis: Reflections on Methodology.” Journal of Jewish Studies 33 (1982): 361–376. Wagner, J. Ross. “‘Not Beyond the Things Which Are Written:’ A Call to Boast Only in the Lord (1 Cor. 4.6).” New Testament Studies 44 (1998): 279–287. Wallace, James Buchanan. Snatched into Paradise (2 Cor 12:1–10): Paul’s Heavenly Journey in the Context of Early Christian Experience. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der Älteren Kirche 179. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter, 2011. Wan, Sze-Kar. Power in Weakness: Conflict and Rhetoric in Paul’s Second Letter to the Corinthians. New Testament in Context. Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 2000. Wassen, Cecilia. “‘Because of the Angels’: Reading 1 Cor. 11:2–16 in Light of the Angelology in the Dead Sea Scrolls.” Pages 735–754 in vol. 2 of The Dead Sea Scrolls in Context: Integrating the Dead Sea Scrolls in the Study of Ancient Texts, Languages, and Cultures. Edited by Armin Lange, Emanuel Tov, and Matthias Weigold in association with Bennie H. Reynolds III. Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 140. Leiden: Brill, 2011. Williams, David J. Paul’s Metaphors: Their Context and Character. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1999. Williamson, Lamar. “Led in Triumph: Paul’s Use of Thriambeuō.” Interpretation 22 (1968): 317–332. Windisch, Hans. Der Zweite Korintherbrief. Meyer, Heinrich August Wilhelm. Kritischexegetischer Kommentar über das Neue Testament. 6. Abt. 9. Aufl. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1924. Wink, Walter. Naming the Powers: The Language of Power in the New Testament. Vol. 1 of The Powers. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984. Wolff, Christian. Der Zweite Brief des Paulus an die Korinther. Theologischer Handkommentar zum Neuen Testament 8. Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1989. Wright, Archie T. The Origin of Evil Spirits: The Reception of Genesis 6.1–4 in Early Jewish Literature. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament. 2/198. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005. Young, Frances M. and David F. Ford. Meaning and Truth in Second Corinthians. Eugene: Wipf and Stock, 1987.

Index of Ancient Sources Biblical Literature Genesis 1 1–3 1:3 1:3–4 1:4b–5 2:7 2:8 3 6:1–3 6:1–4 16:7 Numbers 33:55 Joshua 5:14

93 36, 46, 79–84, 224 82, 116 79–80 93 100 136 34 151 159 196

91:4 116 116:10 116:15 119:133b 142

194 28 116 187 195 28

Proverbs 10:29 21:22 25:16

71 71 187

Ecclesiastes 5:5–6

187

Song of Songs 1:4

187

Isaiah 9:1 11:2 43:18–21 65:17–25 66:22–24

80 103 57 57 57

Jeremiah 9:4–5 9:23–24

78 77, 78

Ezekiel 28:13 28:24 31:8

136 150, 156 136

Daniel 6:10 6:13

192 192

150, 156

181–82

1 Kingdoms 2:3 2:10

78 78

2 Chronicles 32:23

176

Job 1:8–12 1:12 2:3–6 2:6–7

163 163 163 163

Psalms 55:16–17 71:16 88:40 89:40

192 176 71 71

244

Index of Ancient Sources

9:23 10:1 10:1–21 10:7 10:8 10:9 10:12–15 10:13 10:16 10:20

132 132 181 132 132 181 181 182 132 182

Jonah 3:3

52

Nahum 3:12 3:14

71 71

Zechariah 3:2

199

Malachi 3:2

132

Matthew 4:10 4:11 8:5 11:29 14:36 25:41 26:33

199 199 192 48 192 155, 167 192

Mark 1:25 1:25–27 1:40 5:10 5:12 5:17f 5:23 6:56 9:14–29

199 199 192 192 192 192 192 192 153

Luke 1:22 2:37 4:13 8:13

132 192 192, 199 192

13:10–17 13:16 23:43 24:23

154 153 136 132

John 1:14 12:31 16:11 18:22

193 74, 171 74, 171 55

Acts 1:3 5:37–38 8:39 9:15 12:10 22:29 23:2 26:19

132 192 138 66 192 192 55 132

Romans 5:20–21 6:12–14 8 8:4 8:5 8:13 8:19 8:19–23 8:31–37 8:35–39 8:38 8:38–39 8:38b–39 8:39 9:22 11:7 11:8 11:25 11:26 13:12 15:21 16:17 16:20 16:25

36 36 29 54 54 54 132 170 169 210 84, 151, 169 17, 68 72 72 68 167 148 167 167 51 148 152 81 132

1 Corinthians 1:7

132

245

Index of Ancient Sources 1:9 1:10 1:18 1:20 1:23–24 1:26 1:27–28 1:31 2 2:5 2:6 2:6–14 2:6–16 2:7–8 2:8 2:9–13 2:10–13 2:10–14 3:5 3:16–17 3:18 4:6 4:9 4:9–13 4:14–15 4:21 5 5:1–13 5:5 5:9 5:10 5:17 6:3 6:9–11 6:19 7:5 9:1 9:7 10:1–11 10:11 10:16 10:18 10:21 11:10 12–14 12:3 12:7 12:7–11 12:28–30

215 46, 68 114, 118 167 118 54 118 77, 78 169 118 74, 168 215 106, 147, 179 168–69 18, 74, 168 209 106 106 34 172, 209 168 78 151 216 227 47 173 172 18, 176 171 170 170 151 213 172 173, 176 132 51, 60 83 56 215 54 18 151 206 209 206 13 13

13:1 14 14:3–6 14:6 14:22–29 14:26 15 15:24 15:24–26 15:24–28 15:25 15:25–26 15:34 15:42–58 15:51–58 15:52–55 15:57 16:23 2 Corinthians 1 1:1 1:1–2 1:3–5 1:3–6 1:4–11 1:8b–10 1:9 1:10 1:17 1:17–18 1:17–22 1:18 1:21 1:21–22 2 2:8 2:11

2:14 2:14–16 2:14–17 2:15 2:15–16 2:17 2:17–3:3

151 132 13 132 13 132 169 169, 199 97 53 113 34, 36 106 119 202 36 36 214

58 175 166 227 48 28 202 50 202 55, 59, 70 59 70 55 106 209 38 46 18, 23, 34–37, 43, 75, 107, 113, 129, 165–67, 176, 191, 225 112, 113, 115, 116, 123 123 65, 107, 116, 121 113, 114 108 62, 114, 115 62

246 3:1 3:3 3:5–6 3:6 3:7 3:13 3:14 3:14–15 3:14a 3:15–16 3:18 4 4:1 4:2 4:3 4:3–4 4:4

4:4–6 4:4–11 4:4–12 4:5 4:5–15 4:6

4:6–15 4:7 4:7–11 4:7–12 4:8 4:8–9 4:8–10 4:8–12 4:10 4:10–11 4:10–12 4:11 4:11–12 4:12 4:13 4:14 4:16 4:16–18

Index of Ancient Sources 77 117 82 34, 175 83 83 73, 74, 76, 77, 167 74 73, 74 74 175 38 82 118 76, 115 118 18, 23, 35–37, 41, 43, 68, 74, 76, 77, 82–84, 102, 106, 115, 117, 118, 120, 123, 127, 155, 165, 167, 172, 175, 223, 225–27 83 119 113 115, 116 107, 116 79–80, 83, 102, 116, 118, 121, 171, 172, 175 121 66, 119, 225 227 41, 48, 66, 116, 218 218 115, 119 83 216 54, 115 115 172, 218 115 82 115 83, 116 115, 119, 221 172, 227 119

4:17 4:18 5 5:1 5:5 5:10 5:10–11 5:11 5:11b 5:12 5:12–17 5:14 5:15 5:16 5:17 5:17–19 5:17c 5:19 5:20 5:21 6:1 6:4 6:4–5 6:4–7 6:4–10 6:7 6:8–10 6:13–7:2 6:14 6:14–7:1 6:14–15 6:15 6:15a 6:15b 6:16 6:17 7:1 7:3ff 7:6 7:12 8:4 8:6 8:9 8:11 9:9–10 9:13 10

202 172 38, 58 172 106, 209 117 117 117 117 58 59 56, 62 56 55–57, 70, 77 57, 80, 172 82 57 97, 227 46, 47, 82, 116 172 46, 116, 175, 227 175 129 34 41, 82, 216 36, 51, 87, 118 172 171 172, 175, 215 171–73 18 23, 43, 165, 171, 172, 175, 176 172 172 172 173, 216 173 171 47 117 46, 215 23, 46 47 23 83 215 1, 2, 10, 18, 19, 51, 59–60, 62, 69, 70,

Index of Ancient Sources

10–11 10–13

10:1 10:1–2 10:1–6 10:1a 10:2 10:2–3 10:2a 10:2b 10:3 10:3–4 10:3–5 10:3–6

10:4 10:4–5 10:4–6 10:4c–5 10:5

10:5a 10:6 10:7 10:8 10:10 10:10–11 10:11 10:12 10:13 10:13–16 10:14 10:15 10:15–18 10:16 10:17 10:17–18 10:18

79, 120, 158, 224, 225 131, 149, 164 2, 3, 10, 19, 32, 33, 36, 49, 54, 59–70, 77–79, 87, 94, 107, 117, 120, 123, 164, 174, 218, 226 3, 46, 48, 58, 65, 133 34, 45, 46–50, 58 53, 58 48 49, 54, 55, 59, 70, 79, 149 3, 45 70 37, 70 54, 55, 61 53 60 3, 33–36, 45, 49, 50–69, 87, 154, 175, 221, 225 37, 71, 74, 214 71, 131 70–84 118 33, 37, 72, 74–78, 83, 102, 107, 117– 19, 129, 178 74 51, 69 37 77 41, 50, 53, 58, 70, 71, 77, 224 3, 34, 219 37, 48, 56, 70 37, 49, 77–79 77 62 82 77 41 77 78, 131, 145 77 49, 54, 77, 79, 138

10:359 11 11:1–4 11:2 11:3

11:3–4 11:3–6 11:4

11:4–6 11:5 11:6

11:7 11:7–11 11:8 11:11 11:11–15 11:12 11:12–15 11:12–21 11:13 11:13–14 11:13–15

11:14 11:14–15 11:15 11:16–17 11:18 11:19–20 11:19–21

247 56 59 58, 74 227 23, 34, 37, 41, 57, 62, 74, 76, 77, 79, 82–84, 102, 106, 118, 120, 123, 124, 136, 155, 156, 165, 167, 174, 176, 227 34, 35, 71, 75, 83, 119, 209, 223 33, 34 23, 36, 37, 41, 49, 65, 68, 72, 73, 79, 87, 94, 118, 129, 147, 154, 173–75, 181, 201, 215 121 37, 42, 70, 146, 180 12, 37, 41, 49, 53, 71, 77, 79, 87, 102, 107, 117, 118, 123, 124, 131 41, 49, 118, 175 61, 62 60, 61 37, 79 34 61 49 41 23, 41, 42, 80, 118, 129, 175 106, 118 23, 42, 52, 57, 62, 78–80, 87, 123, 124, 145, 152, 153, 155, 166, 174, 181, 213, 215, 223 37, 81, 151, 165, 166, 169 34, 35, 68, 118 80, 83, 123, 129, 151, 175 34 49, 59, 77, 79 79 53, 62

248 11:20 11:21 11:21–23 11:22 11:22–23 11:22–33 11:23 11:23–25 11:23–28 11:23–29 11:23–31 11:23–33 11:23ff 11:24 11:24ff 11:26 11:27 11:28–29 11:29 11:30 11:31 11:32 11:32–33 11:33 12

12:1

12:1–4 12:1–7 12:1–10

12:2 12:2–3 12:2–4 12:2–5 12:3–4 12:4 12:5

Index of Ancient Sources 41, 48, 55, 73, 166, 178 34, 49 54 8, 12, 42, 54, 59 8, 41, 146, 154, 219 15, 41, 82, 124 8, 123, 124, 146, 175, 180 63 63, 118 153 66 15, 65, 115, 119– 20, 123, 129, 216 54 129 54 129, 152 64 57 66 77, 130, 131, 145, 154, 201–2 79, 145 129 66, 123 201 16, 24, 28, 33, 34, 60, 67, 125, 131, 225 4, 8, 12, 14, 16, 20, 124, 130–33, 145, 146, 202 21, 130–44, 189 189–91 1–4, 16, 27, 33, 34, 38, 39, 41, 43, 66, 69, 107, 122, 123– 221, 223 37, 137, 138, 179– 80, 202 79, 124 66, 133, 179, 190 5 139–40 15, 20, 37, 138, 179–80, 202 77, 131, 154

12:5–6 12:6 12:6–10 12:6a 12:7

12:7–10 12:7b–9a 12:7ff 12:8 12:8–10 12:9

12:9–10 12:9b 12:9c–10 12:10 12:11 12:12 12:13–18 12:14 12:14–15 12:15 12:18 12:19 12:20–21 12:21 13 13:1–3 13:1–4 13:2 13:2–3 13:3 13:4 13:5 13:5–6 13:9 13:10

144–48, 180 37, 60, 70–71, 124, 145–46, 221 145 145 14, 20, 30, 33, 35, 37, 41, 68, 73, 102, 122, 124, 129, 132, 133, 138, 146, 148– 66, 178, 180, 190, 191, 206, 209, 219, 220, 223, 225 13, 14, 147 133 67 1, 191, 226 191–204 23, 95, 131, 133, 146–48, 166, 193, 204, 214, 221 66 201 201 15, 129, 154, 200, 201 34, 42, 138, 180, 204 11, 12, 117–18 61, 62 60 60 43, 48 174 213, 224 36, 47, 60, 213 23, 36, 213 68 47, 49, 60 51 36, 50, 60, 213 34, 79 60, 95, 201, 213, 221, 223, 227 47, 48, 58, 166, 202, 204, 214, 221 76, 79, 106, 201 79, 106 68 47, 50

249

Index of Ancient Sources 13:11 13:13 14–15 111:3

37, 68, 79 106, 175, 201, 213– 16 176 41

Galatians 1 1:3 1:4 1:7 1:8 1:12 1:16 1:23–24 2 2:2 2:4 2:9 2:14–16 3:1 3:19 4:1–10 4:14 4:29 5:2–6 5:10 6:1 6:17 6:18

216 97 107, 167 152 151 132 190 216 216 132, 190 152 42 42 114 151 42 151 54 42 152 68 63, 114 214

Ephesians 6:12

224

Philippians 2:1 2:7 2:7f 2:25 3:2 3:2–9 3:4–19 3:7 3:8 3:10 11:41

215 22 48 51 152 42 217 217 56 116 186

Wisdom 2:24

81

3:16 3:17 3:18 4:7 4:9

217 217 151, 152 75, 76 147–48

Colossians 2:15 2:18

199 151

1 Thessalonians 3:10 4:17 5:8

68 138 51

2 Thessalonians 1:7 2:4

151 176

1 Timothy 1:18 3:16 4:1 5:21 6:12

51 151 192 151 51

2 Timothy 2:3–4 2:19 4:7

51 192 51

Philemon 2

51

Hebrews 3:12

192

Revelation 2:7 4:1–2 12:5 12:7 12:9 22:8

136 141 138 167 155, 167 146

250

Index of Ancient Sources

Apocrypha & Pseudepigrapha 1 Enoch Book of Watchers (1–36) 14 205 14:8–9 177–178 14:8–9a 135 14:8–23 135 14:18–20 135–136 15 160 15:9–12 160 15:11 159 15:11–12 159–160 15:12 160 Book of Parables (37–71) 39:3 139, 143 39:3–4 135 40.7 104 52:1 135 52:1–2a 139 60:8 5 65:1–8 161 65:6 104 70:3 5 71:1 141 71:1–5 135 71:5 141 2 Enoch 8:1 20:1

137 138

4 Ezra

205

Apocalypse of Baruch 11:1 137–138 17:3 134 Apocalypse of Abraham 9:6 183 9:9 184 10:3–6 184 13:4–14 184 14:1–14 185 19:4 138 Sirach 43:16

132

2 Maccabees 5:23

176

Jubilees 4:23 5:9–12 10:2 10:3 10:3–6 10:5 10:6 10:8 10:11 10:12 12:20 19:28 49:2

139 57 156 196 196 196 196 197, 209 156 198 197 156 156

Testament of Abraham 8:1–3 143 14:7 143 Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs 2.7 75 19.4 75 The Greek Life of Adam and Eve 16:5 81 17:1–2 81 17:1–4 81 25:1 146 37:3 139 37:4b–5a 137 40:1 137 Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah 1–5 185 2:2 155 3:13 186 5:1 186 5:15–16 186 6–11 185 7:9–12 186 9:6 138 10:29 186 10:29–31 187

251

Index of Ancient Sources 11:41

186

Wisdom 2:24

81

Dead Sea Scrolls War Scroll, 1QM 1.1 1.1–7 1.10–11 1.13 1.14 1.17 1.18 4.6 7.6 9.15–16 10.4 10.6 10.8 10.9 10.10–11 10.11–16 10.16 11.1–2 11.1–14 11.3 11.13–12.6 11.15 12.1 12.4–5 12.8–16 13.1–3 13.2 13.3 13.4 13.7 13.10 13.11 13.11–12 14.3–4 14.4–5 14.9 14.9–11 14.10 15.14 16.11–14

84 84 87 85 85 86 85 87 87 85 87 87 85 85 85 85 85 87 86 87 87 86 85, 87 85 86 87 173 86 87 87 182 156 172 87 87 86 87 86 87 96

17.5–6 182 17.6 86 17.6–7 85 17.7–8 85 17.8 86 18.6 87 18.10 86 19.1–14 86 4QM2 frg. 1.7–13 86 4Q491 frgs.1–3 ll. 9–10 87 4Q491 frgs. 1–31.3 85 4Q491 frgs. 5–6 85 4Q491 frgs. 8–10 11. 6–7 173 4Q491 frg. 10 2.7–14 96 4Q491 frg. 11 1.8–19 (Self–Glorification Hymn) 85 4Q491 frg. 15 11. 8–10 173 4Q491 frg. 15.7–8 85 4Q496 frg. 3 ll. 5–6 173 4Q491–496 (4QM1–6) 84 1QHa Community Hymns cols 1–9, 18–28 4.29 107 4.35 98, 101, 103, 104 4.35–37 98 5 100 5.30 99 5.30–32 99 5.30–33 99 5.32 99 5.32–33 99 5.35b 104 6.36 105, 107 7.15–28 89

252 7.25–26 7.30 7.31–32 7.34 8.30 9 9.7–9 9.23 9.23–25 9.24 9.26 9.28–29 9.28b–29 18.10 18.11 19–20 20.14–15 22.6 24.23

Index of Ancient Sources 105 105 105 99 107 100 89 99–101, 104, 110 99, 100 99, 101, 109, 112 101 101 100, 108 105 105 89 109 104 104

Teacher Hymns cols 10–17 10 107 10.11c–12 107 10.15 108, 110, 122 10.22–24 108 10.27–28 108 11.21c–24 86, 110, 209 12 109 12.3–9 192 12.8 108 12.11–12 108 12.24 110 12.28b–34a 109 12.30 110 12.31 109 13.29 108 13.30 108 13.30–31 108 13.38–39 108 13.39–41 108 13.41 108 15.10 108 1QS 1.16–3.12 2.5 2.19 3–4 10.1–7

94 173 156, 172 93 85, 192

11.10–11 17–18

89 89

Treatise of the Two Spirits [3.13–4.26] 3:15b–16 89 3.13 88, 92, 110 3.13–15a 88 3.14 88 3.15 100 3.15–17 90 3.15b 89 3.17 89 3.17–22 173 3.18–19 90, 209 3.20 92, 156 3.20–21 89, 173 3.20–23 99, 103 3.21 107, 156 3.22 89, 156 3.23 89, 91 3.24 89, 101, 156 3.24–25 86, 89, 92, 95, 96, 208 3.25 90 3.25–4.8 121 4.1 89 4.2 89 4.2–4 89, 94 4.3–4 89 4.5 92 4.6 92 4.6–8 89 4.9–11 89 4.12 89 4.13 89 4.14 89 4.15–25 90 4.16 91 4.18 91 4.18–26 95 4.20–21 91 4.21 91 4.21–22 111 4.21–24 121 4.22 90–92 4.22–26 90 4.23 90, 91 4.23–24 92, 173 4.23–26 209

253

Index of Ancient Sources 4.24 4.25 4.25–26 4.26

4QTLevia, Aramaic Levi Document 3.5–10 103 5.35b–36 104 6.36 105 9b 194 v. 7 105

90 92 92 91

Damascus Document (CD) 2.6 156 11Q5 – Column XIX Plea for Deliverance ll. 15–16 195

"The Prayer of Levi" 7–11 103

Early Christian Literature Ambrose Of the Christian Faith 1.10.65 25

Hilary of Pontiers On the Trinity 5.32

26

Clement of Alexandra Miscellanies 5.12.79

John Chyrsostom 24

Cyril of Jerusalem Catechetical Lecture 14.26 26 On the Mysteries 2.3

32

Dionysius of Alexandria On the Promises

25

Eusebius Church History 7.25

2 Corinthians Homilies 22 27 26 27, 28 2 Timothy Homilies 10 28 Acts Homilies 2

27

Lactantius Divine Institutes 14.1ff

31

Origen 25

Gregory of Nazianzus The Second Theological Oration 20 24 In Defense of His Flight to Pontus 56 25

On Prayer 1 2.3

29 29

Exhortation to Martyrdom 3.13 29 Against Celsus 8.73

31

254

Index of Ancient Sources Tertullian

On First Principles 3.2.1 3.2.5 3.3.2 3.3.6

31 31 32 32

On Prescription Against Heretics 24 25 To Scapula 2

30

Additional Ancient Authors and Texts Arrian Anabasis of Alexander 7.10.1–2 64

Homer Illiad 12.49–64

157

Cassius Dio Historica Romana 6.23 112 37.52.3 62 40.40.5–6 157

Horace Odes 4.2.50–51

112

Josephus Diodorus Siculus Bibliotheca Historica 5.32.6 158 12.84.2 68 13.38.5 68 13.70.2 68 13.80.5 68 13.97.1 68 14.115.6 61 16.16.3 68 19.61.5 68 19.62.8 68 33.15.1 158 Dionysius of Halicarnassus The Roman Antiquities 6.25.3 62 Synopse zur Hekhalot-Literatur §346 188 Herodotus 1.80.19 9.66

58 65

Jewish War 1.193 7.136 7.150–153

63 112 112

Livy 7.26–27

113

Lucian Icaromenippus 2

146

Mithras Liturgy 539–547 556–560 565–573

211 211 212

Onasander The General 1.4 10.5 42.15

64 64 62

255

Index of Ancient Sources Philo De Confusione Linguarum, 129 71 131 71 De Gigantibus 7.31

143, 146

Legum Allegoriae 2.15.53–56 143 2.57 144 3.27 144 Flaccus 47

61

De Somnis 1.191

144

Quod Deterius Potiori insidiari solet 175f 144 Philostratus

5.22 21

113 112

Pompey 45

112

De Genio Socrates 590 142,146 De Iside et Osiride 360 143–144 De Sera Numinis Vindicta, 563 142, 178–179 564 142 568 142 Polybius The Histories 1.47.6 3.69.8–13 3.95.2 20.5.9

68 61 68 60

Life of Appollonius 3.26 144

Sallust

Plotinus

Bellum Jugurthinum, 85.29–30 63 85.33–34 63

Enneads 6.7.18–21

177

Plutarch Alexander 7.1

68

Caesar 26.2.11

61

Marcellus

Suetonius Nero 25.2

112

Tosefta

187

Xenophon Hellenica 7.4.26

61

Index of Modern Authors Adams, E. 57, 72, 170 Alexander, P.S. 89, 92 Ashton, J. 201 Baird, W. 3, 4, 153, 165, 168, 204 Barnett, P. 3, 4, 42, 61, 62, 66, 113, 125, 132, 145, 148, 149, 163, 180, 194, 200, 204 Barré, M. 154 Barrett, C.K. 4, 42, 47, 72, 112, 113, 119, 144 Baur, F.C. 5–9, 11 Becker, E-M. 134, 153, 224 Benoit, P. 168 Berg, S. 38, 98, 99, 106, 147 Berger, P. 127 Best, E. 3, 153 Betz, H. 2, 10, 13–16, 117, 192, 193, 210–212, 224 Bietenhard, H. 164 Bosenius, B. 203, 218 Bousset, W. 5, 18, 19, 164, 187, 188 Bowens, L. 51 Brady, D. 153–154, 179 Brink, L. 50, 60, 68, 112 Brown, A. 119–120 Bultmann, R. 165 Calvin, J. 3 Carr, W. 169 Clines, D.J. 153 Collins, J.J. 37, 85, 95, 96, 139, 159, 182, 183, 205, 207 Davies, P.R. 84 Davis, B. 114 de Boer, M.C. 36, 98, 126, 169, 170 de Jonge, M. 75, 80, 172 Dean-Otting, M. 39 Dibelius, M. 168, 174 Dimant, D. 92, 101 Dodd, B. 217

Donfried, K. 172 Drawnel, H. 102, 103, 177, 194 Duff, P. 112 Duhaime, J. 84, 85, 87 Dunn, J.D.G. 134 Eastman, S. 114, 116 Eco, U. 40–41, 46, 72, 83, 123, 190, 225 Egan, R.B. 112 Engberg-Pedersen, T. 126, 170, 174 Eshel, E. 102–104, 177, 194 Fitzgerald, J.T. 65, 113, 171 Flusser, D. 195 Ford, D.F. 3, 167, 194 Frey, J. 88, 92–95, 173 Furnish, V.P. 3, 4, 42, 51, 66, 132, 134, 149–154, 165, 171, 174, 192, 194, 203, 212 Garland, D.E. 3–5, 16, 50, 133–134, 163–164, 204, 212 Garrett, S. 82, 106, 165, 168 Gaventa, B.R. 62, 69, 216, 217 Georgi, D. 14, 174 Glancy, J.A. 63–65 Gooder, P. 15, 19–20, 33, 124, 136, 138, 149, 164, 179, 188, 203 Goulder, M.D. 135 Gräßer, E. 49, 68, 73, 75, 164, 192, 221 Greenfield, J.C. 102–104, 177, 193, 194 Hafemann, S.J. 127 Halperin, D.J. 184 Harris, M.J. 2, 4, 13, 42, 43, 50–52, 54, 55, 61, 66, 68, 73, 112–115, 117, 132, 133, 138, 140, 141, 145–146, 148, 149, 153, 162–163, 165, 175, 178, 180, 200 Hawthorne, G. 75 Hays, R.B. 114

Index of Modern Authors Heckel, U. 193 Heger, P. 88 Heininger, B. 13, 20, 131, 133, 143, 146, 147, 149 Hempel, C. 88 Himmelfarb, M. 39, 139, 204–6 Hooker, M.D. 55, 57 Jewett, R. 52–53, 56, 73, 74, 152, 169 Käsemann, E. 10–13, 16, 37, 42, 117, 168 Keener, C.S. 42, 150, 151, 168 Klauck, H.J. 143, 163 Lambrecht, J. 2, 48, 50, 67, 132, 200 Lange, A. 88, 195, 196 Leonhardt-Balzer, J. 95 Levison, J. 100 Lichtenberger, H. 192, 198, 200 Lincoln, A. 3–4, 16–21, 33, 39, 131, 133, 138–140, 204 MacGregor, G.H.C. 168–169, 223 Maier, J. 127, 139, 161 Malherbe, A. 33, 60, 71, 74 Marshall, P. 112, 153 Martin, R.P. 4, 20, 61, 117, 131–132, 149, 162, 164, 165, 171, 172, 174, 192, 215, 217 Martyn, J.L. 56–59, 63, 65, 66, 75, 84, 106, 119, 173, 217 Maston, J. 90, 99, 100 Matera, F. 16, 20, 42, 50, 66, 67, 112– 114, 131, 204 Meeks, W. 126 Menoud, P.H. 150, 154 Metzger, B.M. 148 Millard, A.R. 182 Mitchell, M.M. 3, 126 Montgomery, J. 182 Morray-Jones,C.R. 17, 19, 33, 39, 132, 138, 140–141, 149, 152, 164, 180, 187, 188 Mullins, T.Y. 150 Murphy-O'Connor, J. 4–5, 150 Neusner, J. 127 Newsom, C. 93, 98 Nickelsburg, G. 135, 159, 161, 162 Park, D.M. 157, 158 Plummer, A. 5–7, 73, 117, 130, 166, 180 Popović, M. 90

257

Porter, S.E. 58 Price, R.M. 2, 19, 33, 149, 152, 154, 156, 164, 180, 188 Reitzenstein, R. 5, 8–10 Rienecker, F. 178, 180 Roetzel, C.J. 51 Saake, H. 16, 17 Sampley, J.P. 4 Sanders, E.P. 143 Satake, A. 67, 201–2 Schäfer, P. 187–188 Schmeller, T. 47, 48 Schmithals, W. 8–9, 18 Schnelle, U. 11, 42–43, 61 Scholem, G.G. 19, 187 Schuller, E.M. 98 Schütz, J.H. 3, 4 Schweitzer, A. 5–6 Scott, J. 113, 127 Segal, A.F. 2, 39, 131, 139, 206 Smith, M. 85, 135, 139 Smith-Christopher, D.L. 182 Stone, M.E. 92, 102–104, 177, 193– 194, 204, 205, 207 Stuckenbruck, L.T. 30, 35, 39, 57, 86, 88, 91–93, 97, 98, 127, 128, 151, 159–161, 192, 195–198, 220 Sumney, J. 21 Tabor, J.D. 2, 3, 16–19, 21, 33, 39, 130, 133, 138–140, 153, 155, 161, 189 Thierry, J.J. 30, 150, 153, 199 Thrall, M.E. 4, 15, 16, 42, 47, 48, 50, 52, 53, 59–61, 112, 134, 138, 140, 149, 150, 152–154, 163, 164, 215 Tromp, J. 80, 137, 139 Tronier, H. 126 VanderKam,J. 196, 197 Vermes, G. 125–127, 206 Wagner, J.R. 78 Wallace, J.B. 15, 19, 21–23, 30, 33, 39, 41, 138, 155, 189, 219 Wan, S. 2, 50 Wassen, C. 151 Williams, D.J. 50, 54 Williamson, L. 113 Windisch, H. 5, 7–8, 143, 144, 174, 188, 192, 199, 224 Wink, W. 168, 169

258 Wolff, C. 213, 214, 218 Wright, A.T. 160, 161

Index of Modern Authors Young, F.M. 3, 167, 194

Index of Subjects Anthropology 29–30, 35, 37–41, 43, 45, 46, 53, 82–83, 85, 90, 93–94, 97, 100, 104, 107, 118, 120–124, 127– 129, 161, 183, 197, 203, 220, 225, 228 – theological 35, 37–38, 83, 120–121 Apocalyptic/Cosmic Battle 1, 3, 8, 18, 23–24, 33–38, 43, 45, 51–54, 57, 68–69, 80, 83, 90, 95, 118–119, 124, 126, 130, 159, 162, 170–171, 220, 221, 226 ἁρπάζω 20, 130, 138, 179–180, 189 ἄρρητα ῤήµατα 20, 24, 25, 130, 143 Cognitive 37–38, 45, 71, 116, 124, 225 see also Epistemology Community Hymns 98, 102–107, 109, 111 Cosmology 1, 17–19, 23, 24, 29–32, 35–41, 43, 44, 46, 51–52, 58, 72–73, 82, 84–86, 88, 92–93, 97, 100, 104, 106, 107, 118, 120–124, 128–130, 135, 136, 138, 141, 151, 154, 159, 161, 169–171, 183, 197, 200, 203, 211, 220–221, 223–228 see also Apocalyptic/Cosmic Battle Demons, demonic 30–32, 37, 39, 41, 90, 104, 127, 128, 156, 160–162, 168, 170, 174, 180, 189, 192, 193, 195, 196–198, 200, 214, 220, 226 Dualism 36, 88, 90, 92, 93, 103, 110, 163, 170, 172, 173, 175 – cosmic 92 – ethical 90, 92 – psycholgical 92–93 Encyclopedia 40–41, 46, 72, 84, 120, 123, 190, 225, 226 Epistemology 30, 33, 35, 37–41, 43, 45–46, 56–58, 70, 75–79, 82, 83, 85, 93, 94, 97, 100, 106, 107, 117, 118,

120–124, 128, 129, 183, 197, 202, 208, 220, 225 False Apostles 6–8, 14, 17, 22, 27, 41, 42, 48, 52, 56, 61, 62, 69, 71, 73, 78–82, 84, 87, 94, 124, 129–131, 145, 147, 152, 156, 164–166, 174, 175, 178, 183, 191, 213, 216, 217, 223, 224 see also Super-apostles Flesh 2, 3, 6, 15, 19, 28, 31, 46, 47, 50, 52–60, 70, 91, 93, 95, 98–101, 104, 109–111, 113, 115, 122, 130, 133, 143, 148–150, 152–156, 160, 162, 173, 175, 179–180, 190, 195, 203, 220, 226 God of this age 74–76, 82–84, 94, 96, 106, 115, 118–120, 123, 165, 167, 170, 171, 175, 190, 202, 220 Grace 26, 28, 34, 35, 46, 95, 102, 105, 147, 191, 193, 198–201, 208, 209, 212–216, 221, 225, 227 Greek Life of Adam and Eve 39, 80– 81, 137, 139 Knowledge γνῶσις 10, 37, 87, 104, 118, 120, 123 λογισµός 37, 70, 71, 120 λογίζοµαι 46, 70, 120, 124, 146 Military or Martial Imagery 1, 3, 10, 20, 24, 27, 33, 38, 43, 45, 50–69, 74–75, 108, 112, 120, 124, 157–159, 164, 182, 190, 208, 223–225 Mind νόηµα 37, 50, 70, 73–77, 80, 84, 120, 166, 225 οἶδα 37, 70, 79, 120, 124, 130 Opponents 1–12, 14–16, 21–22, 41–43, 47–49, 51, 54, 60–62, 65–67, 77–79,

260

Index of Subjects

108, 117–118, 149–154, 174, 219 see also Super-apostles Paradise 5, 9, 17, 25–26, 29, 80–81, 130–133, 136–141, 145, 149, 155, 180, 202 Parody 13–16, 193 Peristasis Catalogs 15, 27, 63–64, 66– 67, 154, 202 Prayers of Deliverance 1, 31, 39, 128, 199, 208, 220, 226 Revelations 4–8, 14–17, 19–22, 24–27, 29–30, 82, 83, 121–123, 127–36, 135, 138, 145–150, 159, 161, 178– 183, 189–190, 206, 209–211, 219 Rulers of this age 168, 169 Satan 15, 18, 19, 22, 23, 31–38, 42, 43, 62, 66, 68, 69, 74–76, 78, 80–84, 87, 94, 96, 102–107, 118–120, 122–125, 130, 133, 135–137, 145, 147–156, 158–167, 169–176, 178–181, 183, 185–188, 190–191, 193–195, 197– 201, 208–210, 212, 213, 219–221, 223, 225–227

Super-apostles 6, 9–10, 34, 42, 43, 54, 62, 70–71, 78, 79, 130, 146, 175, 178, 180, 219 συνίηµι 37, 77, 78 Teacher Hymns 98, 107, 110–113, 119, 121, 147 Third Heaven 15, 19, 20, 24–26, 29, 124, 129–130, 134, 136–141, 143– 145, 148, 149, 161, 164, 179, 188, 189, 202, 203, 219, 221 Thorn (σκόλοψ) 29, 124, 128, 148–150, 152, 153, 156–159, 162–164, 175, 180, 190, 225 φανερόω 112, 115, 117, 120 φρονέω 37, 79, 120 Visions 2, 4–8, 10, 15–17, 19–21, 25, 33, 53, 127–136, 138–139, 145, 151–53, 156, 177–186, 204–206, 219 Warfare Imagery 1, 33, 35, 47, 50–51, 59, 62, 65, 69 see also Military or Martial Imagery