The Church in the Wilderness: Paul's Use of Exodus Traditions in 1 Corinthians 3161536053, 9783161536052

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)

379

Carla Swafford Works

The Church in the Wilderness Paul’s Use of Exodus Traditions in 1 Corinthians

Mohr Siebeck

Carla Swafford Works, born 1976; 1998 BA Williams Baptist College; 2002 MA (Th) Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary; 2004 MAR Yale University Divinity School; 2011 PhD Princeton Theological Seminary; currently Assistant Professor of New Testament at Wesley Theological Seminary, Washington, D.C.

e-ISBN PDF 978-3-16-153606-9 ISBN 978-3-16-153605-2 ISSN 0340-9570 (Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament, 2. Reihe) The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de.

© 2014 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 Nehren on non-aging paper and bound by Buchbinderei Nädele in Nehren. Printed in Germany.

To Nick, Jonathan, and Katherine Grace, my loving companions on this wilderness journey

Preface God has placed countless people in my life who have walked with me and encouraged me along this wilderness journey. It would be impossible to list them all here. This book is a revision of my doctoral dissertation. I would not be submitting this work without my mentors and teachers at Princeton Theological Seminary. It is with much gratitude that I thank the members of my dissertation committee, Professors J. Ross Wagner, Shane Berg, and Beverly Roberts Gaventa. Professor Gaventa served as a mentor to me during my entire study at Princeton and has continued to mentor me during my first years of teaching. I am grateful for her guidance, her sound advice, and her constant encouragement over the years. She provided probing questions throughout this project, and her insights and concerns linger with me. Also, I am deeply indebted to Professor Wagner for agreeing to supervise this work and for nurturing the curiosity of a project birthed in his 1 Corinthians seminar during my first year of course work. Over the years, he has not only served as an advisor, but has demonstrated his constant faith that the God who called me to this task would indeed provide all that I needed to finish. To my colleagues and students at Wesley Theological Seminary, I give thanks beyond measure. I especially want to thank Bruce Birch, Amy Oden, Sharon Ringe, and Denise Dombkowski Hopkins for providing opportunities for me to write while teaching. For my faculty prayer group, I thank God for their constant support and encouragement, and I am humbled by their commitment to be the church of God. The publication of this book would not be possible without the publication team at Mohr Siebeck. Special thanks is due to Dr. Henning Ziebritzki and Dr. Jörg Frey for supporting the publication of this project. Also, it was a joy to work with Matthias Spitzner whose production expertise resulted in the layout of the document and whose abundant patience was both astounding and humbling. Any errors found in the content of this work are completely my own. I also want to express gratitude to Kendra Mäschke for marketing this work. To my family, I am ever grateful to God for your presence, your love, and your unwavering support. My parents and in-laws made countless trips across the country to visit us, to help us during difficult times, and to walk with us on this faith journey. It is the constant support of my husband that

VIII

Preface

has been a joyful blessing along the way. To my loving husband Nick, you have always encouraged me to be the person whom God has called me to be. Without your discernment and faithfulness, I would not have had the courage to take the road less traveled. I am grateful for your partnership on this journey, and I thank God for the blessing of our children. My son Jonathan, I wish that there were words to express how great a gift from God that you truly are. My daughter Katherine Grace, you are nothing short of a miracle. I thank my God always for all of you. Carla Swafford Works Pentecost 2014

Table of Contents Preface .............................................................................................................. VII   Abbreviations ................................................................................................... XII  

Introduction: Being the Church of God in Corinth ............................. 1   A. Situating this Study ........................................................................................ 3   B. Paul and the Corinthian Congregation as Readers of Scripture ................ 12   C. An Overview ................................................................................................ 17  

Chapter One: God and the So-Called Gods: Teaching the Corinthians to be the “Church of God” ................................................ 19   A.    “Many Gods and Many Lords” ................................................................... 20   I. Corinth’s Religious Landscape ........................................................... 20   II. The Corinthian Church and the Problem of Many Gods and Many Lords......................................................................................... 24   B. The Power of Paideia ................................................................................... 27   C. One God and One Lord: Pauline Paideia with Exodus Traditions ............ 31   I. The Power of the Exodus Tradition as Paideia ................................... 31   II. Passover and Paideia ........................................................................... 36   III. Concluding Reflections on the Power of Exodus Traditions ............. 38   IV. Pauline Paideia, Israel’s Exodus, and 1 Corinthians .......................... 39   D. Conclusion: Being the Church of God in Corinth ....................................... 40  

Chapter Two: A “New” Past: 1 Corinthians 10:1–22 Part One ... 42   A. Situating this Reading ................................................................................... 43   B. 1 Corinthians 10:1–13: The Legacy of Faithfulness .................................... 47  

X

Table of Contents

I. 1 Corinthians 10:1–5: God-Created Unity .......................................... 47   1. The Rites of Baptism and Eucharist Among the Corinthians ......... 48 2. The Rites of Baptism and Eucharist Among the “Ancestors” ....... 51 3. “Our Ancestors” ............................................................................. 52 4. The Ancestors’ Baptism ................................................................ 54 5. Baptism into Moses ....................................................................... 55 6. Baptism “in the Cloud and in the Sea” .......................................... 60 7. The “Eucharist” of the Israelites .................................................... 61 8. Summary: Revisiting 1 Corinthians 10:1–5 and Hearing the Dire Warning .......................................................................................... 63 II. 1 Corinthians 10:6–11: Learning from the Mistakes of Our Ancestors ................................................................................. 64 1. The Ancestral Examples ................................................................. 65 2. The Ancestral Transgressions ......................................................... 69 a. Craving Evil ............................................................................... 70 b. Idolatry ....................................................................................... 71 c. Porneia........................................................................................ 73 d. Testing Christ ............................................................................. 75 e. Grumbling .................................................................................. 76 3. Summary ............................................................................................ 78   C. Our Theological Past: Serving the Faithful God of our Ancestors .............. 79   I. Illustrating God’s Unswerving Faithfulness ....................................... 81   II. God’s Faithfulness in 1 Corinthians ................................................... 84   D. Conclusions .................................................................................................. 87  

Chapter Three: The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present: 1 Corinthians 10:1–22 Part Two ............................................................. 89 A. 1 Corinthians 10:16–17: The Eucharistic Tie that Binds ............................. 90   Summary ................................................................................................... 97   B. 1 Corinthians 10:18–20: The Bond of Fellowship in Sacrifice .................... 98   I. 1 Corinthians 10:18: The Israelites as Partners in the Altar .............. 98   II. 1 Corinthians 10:19–20: The Sacrifices at the Corinthian Temples . 100   1. Idol Food and the Table of Demons: Looking Back at 8:1–13... 101 2. The Table of the Lord and the Table of Demons: 1 Corinthians 10:19–20 ................................................................ 109 Summary ........................................................................................... 113 C. 1 Corinthians 10:21–22: Kοινωνία with a Jealous God ............................. 114   Summary ................................................................................................. 120   D. Conclusions for 1 Corinthians 10:14–22 ................................................... 121  

Table of Contents

XI

E. Revisiting the Whole: Reading 1 Corinthians 10:1–22 .............................. 122   I. Reading the Exodus through the Wisdom of the Cross .................... 122   II. “God is really among you”: The Story of God for the Church of God .................................................................................. 123  

Chapter Four: Be as You Really Are: 1 Corinthians 5:6–8 .......... 125   A.    1 Corinthians 5:1–5: The Dilemma ........................................................... 126   B. 1 Corinthians 5:6–8: Be As You Really Are ............................................. 133   I. 1 Corinthians 5:6–7a: Cleanse Out the Old Leaven......................... 133 II. 1 Corinthians 5:7b: The Paschal Sacrifice ........................................ 139 1. Christ, Our Πάσχα ....................................................................... 139   2. A Paschal People ......................................................................... 140 III. 1 Corinthians 5:8: Let Us Feast ........................................................ 144 1. “Not Even Among the Gentiles:” The Significance of the Invitation ........................................................................... 146 2. The Corinthians and Passover ...................................................... 147 3. Paul’s Treatment of the Paschal Tradition ................................... 150 C. 1 Corinthians 5:9-13: Drive Out the Wicked Person ................................ 151   D. Being “A New Lump:” The Identity of the Community ............................ 155   E. Paul’s Use of Exodus Traditions in 1 Corinthians 5:6–8 ......................... 157  

Conclusion: Paul’s Use of Exodus Traditions in 1 Corinthians .. 160   A. Re-reading the Exodus Traditions in Literary Order ................................ 160   B. Paul’s Use of Exodus Traditions ............................................................... 164   C. Conclusion: The “Church of God” in Corinth ......................................... 166   Bibliography .................................................................................................... 169 Index of Ancient Sources ................................................................................ 187 Index of Modern Authors ................................................................................ 201 Index of Subjects ............................................................................................. 204  

Abbreviations Abbreviations AB ABD AGJU ANTC AThR BA BECNT Bib BBR BHT BK BT BTB CBQ CTR EDNT ETL EstEcl EvQ ExpTim FRLANT GOTR HNT HNTC HTR Int JBL JETS JAAR JRA JSNT JSOT JSPSupS JSNTSup MSJ

Anchor Bible Anchor Bible Dictionary Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums Abingdon New Testament Commentary Anglical Theological Review Biblical Archaeologist Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament Biblica Bulletin for Biblical Research Beiträge zur historischen Theologie Bibel und Kirche The Bible Translator Biblical Theology Bulletin Catholic Biblical Quarterly Criswell Theological Review Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses Estudios bíblicos Evangelical Quarterly Expository Times Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments Greek Orthodox Theological Review Handbuch zum Neuen Testament Harper’s New Testament Commentaries Harvard Theological Review Interpretation Journal of Biblical Literature Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society Journal of the American Academy of Religion Journal of Roman Archaeology Journal for the Study of the New Testament Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha: Supplement Series Journal for the Study of the New Testament: Supplement Series The Master’s Seminary Journal

Abbreviations Neot NICNT NIGTC NovT NTS OGIS OTL ResQ RevExp RIDA SBLDS SJT SNTSMS SNTSU TDNT TJ TynBul VR UBS WUNT ZNW

XIII

Neotestamentica New International Commentary on the New Testament New International Greek Testament Commentary Novum Testamentum New Testament Studies Orientis graeci inscriptiones selectae Old Testament Library Restoration Quarterly Review and Expositor Revue internationale des droits de l’antiquité Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series Scottish Journal of Theology Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series Studien zum Neuen Testament und seiner Umwelt Theological Dictionary of the New Testament Trinity Journal Tyndale Bulletin Vox reformata United Bible Society Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche

Introduction

Being the Church of God in Corinth Stories have the power to shape a people. In his book on Jewish identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora, John Collins claims, Identity, whether of a people or of an individual, is a matter of knowing who one is, where one is coming from, and where one is going. . . . Any group that holds unusual views is inevitably under pressure to establish its plausibility, not only to win the respect of outsid1 ers, but primarily to maintain the allegiance of its own members.

Although Collins’s concern is the maintenance of Jewish identity amidst Hellenistic culture, his observations about identity struggles may be applied to numerous groups in any culture. Several factors influence the formation and identity of a group – such as ethnicity, a common language, or shared experiences – but stories tend to unite a community, particularly stories that explain a people’s origins.2 It so happens, however, that the story that explains the origins of the early Christian movement is, as Collins might say, “unusual.” Paul would agree. In the beginning of 1 Corinthians, Paul warns the believers that the “word of the cross” is “foolishness to those who are perishing” (1:18), and in 2:1–5 Paul delights that the power of this story is not contingent upon his eloquence to convey it.3 In contrast to Paul’s confidence in 1

John J. Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem (New York: Crossroad, 1983), 1–2. See Judith Lieu, Christian Identity in the Jewish and Graeco-Roman World (Oxford: University Press, 2004), 62–63, 312–316. Regarding the importance of the exodus story in particular see e.g. M. Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel (Oxford: Clarendon, 1985), 358–379; D. Daube, The Exodus Pattern in the Bible (London: Faber and Faber, 1963). 3 Defining “story” is no easy task. The enterprise is further complicated by the fact that Paul is writing letters, not narratives. For larger discussions of the complexity and difficulties of outlining a narrative substructure to Paul’s gospel see the essays in Bruce W. Longenecker, Narrative Dynamics in Paul: A Critical Assessment (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002). The definition of story in Paul’s letters must, by necessity, be a loose definition. The following is a working definition of story: “Story is a series of events that can be perceived as sequentially and consequentially connected. Typically, stories have characters, settings, and a trajectory” (Edward Adams, Narrative Dynamics, 23). Story is a means to pass along a tradition. In the case of Israel’s exodus, Paul is appealing to traditions that have been narrated already in Israel’s scriptures. For our purposes, the stories and traditions of interest are those that help explain the origins of a people, and these have 2

2

Introduction

the wisdom of the cross, however, the letter of 1 Corinthians reveals glimpses of a community that, in Paul’s eyes, is failing to reconcile their everyday lives with a seemingly “foolish” story. The church is fractured, and this lack of unity so early in the history of the church’s formation threatens the distinctiveness of the community and the allegiance of its own members. For example, when Paul reprimands the behavior of the Corinthians’ eucharist practices, he frames their behavior as a threat to the church: “Do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing?” (11:22; cf. 1:10; 5:1– 13; 6:12–20; 8:1–11:1). The apostle counters the church’s divisiveness by rearticulating the gospel in which they all believed (1:18–3:23; 11:23–26; 15:1–11) and by reminding the Corinthians of what they all have in common, “You are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s” (3:23).4 Through Christ, their identity is bound to God, as the title “church of God” conveys (1:2; 10:32). The power of the gospel grants the Corinthians a new heritage in a faithful God. God is the source of their life in Christ (1:30). God is the one who called them into fellowship with his Son (1:9), and it is the coming of the Lord that they all await (1:7; 11:26; 16:22). Every facet of the Corinthians’ existence as a church is bound to the work of a jealous and faithful God (1:9; 10:13, 22). For Paul, the sum of their identity – who they are, where they have been, and where they are going – hinges upon God’s work through Christ. While the word of the cross frames Paul’s instructions to this community (1:18–2:5), Paul also turns to scripture to instruct the church (10:11). Indeed, for Paul there is an intricate connection between God’s good news of the cross and God’s deeds in scripture. The “gospel of God” was promised in the holy scriptures (Rom 1:1–2). Christ died and was raised in accordance with scripture (1 Cor 15:3–4). Paul, however, did not come to this interpretation of scripture until God revealed his Son to him (Gal 1:16; cf. 1:12). This “revelation (ἀποκαλύψεως) of Jesus Christ” (Gal 1:12) forced Paul to revisit every-

been given various titles. Alan Kirk refers to them as “master commemorative narratives” which do more than preserve the past but help shape perceptions of the present (“Social and Cultural Memory,” in Memory, Tradition, and Text: Uses of the Past in Early Christianity, ed. A. Kirk and T. Thatcher, Semeia Studies [Atlanta: SBL, 2005], 15). My use of the term “story” here has been greatly influenced by tradition theory, particularly how elements of traditions may be, and at times have been, told in narrative form (See the discussion of traditions in Chapter One). The biblical witnesses appeal to multiple elements of the traditions of the exodus and of the gospel. Sometimes these traditions are transmitted in narrative form, but at other times only specific elements of these traditions are highlighted. Paul, for instance, highlights different elements of the gospel to meet his rhetorical needs (consider 1 Cor 1:18–2:5; cf. 15:1–11) and alludes to various features of exodus traditions (5:6–8; 10:1–22). 4 Margaret Mitchell has demonstrated that a direct objective of this letter is to establish unity in the Corinthian church, Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1991).

A. Situating this Study

3

thing he thought he knew about God’s work in the world. Since scripture is, first and foremost, about God, the revelation of Christ prompted Paul to reinterpret scripture in light of God’s ἀποκαλύψεως through the cross. Scripture helps Paul articulate the identity of this God and the implications of being identified as “God’s people.” Thus, Paul finds in scripture a formative tool to instruct believers how to live faithfully as the church of God (Rom 15:4; 1 Cor 10:11).5 To demonstrate how completely the believers depend upon God for their very existence, Paul, at two points in 1 Corinthians, appeals to a story associated with Israel’s origins – the exodus story.6 To urge the Corinthians to live in a manner that glorifies God, Paul relies upon Israel’s exodus traditions – either through paschal imagery as in chapter 5 or through a rehearsal of exodus traditions in chapter 10. These appeals to Israel’s exodus may not seem like such a radical move for a “Hebrew of Hebrews” (Phil 3:5), but it is a rather bold strategy when one considers that the Corinthian church is largely composed of Gentiles, not Jews (1 Cor 6:11; 12:2).7 Why would Paul appeal to the origin stories of the Jews to instruct a predominantly Gentile community? The answer to this question requires some framing. First, it is necessary to view the exodus not solely as a story that sheds light on the origin of a people, but also as a story that reveals to a people the identity of their God. As will be argued in Chapter One, the exodus is first and foremost a story about God. Second, this same God has been revealed through the wisdom of the cross. This God is the one who has acted through Jesus and has called the Corinthians to be the church. It is only through Christ that the Corinthians can claim the Israelites as their “ancestors” (10:1). As Paul reminds the Corinthians twice in this letter, the God who called both the ancestors and the Corinthians is faithful (1:9; 10:13). In what follows, I argue that Paul’s use of exodus traditions in this letter teaches the Corinthians how to live faithfully as the church of God.

A. Situating this Study A. Situating this Study

The present examination of Paul’s use of exodus traditions in 1 Corinthians weds two conversations: one concerning Paul’s use of Israel’s scripture and 5

See discussions below, pages 19–25. It is not the intention of this project to offer a comprehensive account of Paul’s use of scripture in 1 Corinthians. Examining how Paul uses exodus traditions in these specific texts, however, illumines how scripture can inform Paul’s arguments. 7 See discussion “Paul and the Corinthian Congregation as Readers of Scripture,” below. 6

4

Introduction

the other regarding the identity formation of the early church. First, at the heart of this study is an investigation of Paul’s appeal to Israel’s exodus tradition in 1 Corinthians. Although there is only one explicit citation of this tradition in 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 10:7),8 Paul’s most extensive use of scripture in this letter involves repeated allusions to Israel’s exodus story (10:1–22). This project has benefited from the abundance of scholarship on Paul’s use of scripture, but is particularly indebted to two key insights. First, Paul’s thought is profoundly shaped by scripture.9 As Christopher Stanley acknowledges, “Paul remains deeply engaged with the Jewish Scriptures throughout his life, so that his thinking and mode of expression were continually shaped by the symbolic universe of the Bible and the language of specific passages.”10 Furthermore, Francis Watson has strongly argued that scripture does not merely float on the surface of Paul’s letters. Rather, “it goes all the way down.”11 The revelation of Jesus Christ to Paul does not

8 1 Cor 10:7 includes the quotation formula “as it is written” before citing Exodus 32:6. This format of quotation meets the requirements defined by Christopher Stanley for a “citation.” Stanley argues for three criteria used to determine which verses might be considered a citation of scripture: “(1) those introduced by an explicit quotation formula (“as it is written,” “therefore it says,” etc.); (2) those accompanied by a clear interpretive gloss (e.eg. 1 Cor 15.27); and (3) those that stand in demonstrable syntactical tension with their new literary environment (e.g. Rom 9.7, 10.18, Gal 3.12)” (Paul and the Language of Scripture: Citation Technique in the Pauline Epistles and Contemporary Literature [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992], 56–57). 9 Investigations of Paul’s use of scripture have also strongly argued that Paul’s arguments have been influenced by scripture rather than simply using scripture as prooftexts. Scripture informed Paul’s perception of the world. See Sylvia Keesmaat, Paul and His Story: (Re)Interpreting the Exodus Tradition, Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement Series 181 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1999); J. Ross Wagner, Heralds of the Good News: Isaiah and Paul “in Concert” in the Letter to the Romans (Leiden: Brill, 2002); Francis Watson, Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith (London: T & T Clark, 2004); Richard Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989); idem, Conversion of the Imagination: Paul as Interpreter of Israel’s Scripture (Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 2005); James W. Aageson, Written Also for Our Sake: Paul and the Art of Biblical Interpretation (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1993); R. H. Bell, Provoked to Jealousy: The Origin and Purpose of the Jealousy Motif in Romans 9–11, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2.63 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1994); F. Wilk, Die Bedeutung des Jesajabuches für Paulus, Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 179 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998); C. A. Evans and J. A. Sanders, eds., Paul and the Scriptures of Israel, JSNTSup 83 (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993). 10 Christopher Stanley, Arguing with Scripture: The Rhetoric of Quotations in the Letters of Paul (New York: T & T Clark, 2004), 1. 11 Francis Watson, “Scripture in Pauline Theology: How Far Down Does It Go?” Journal of Theological Interpretation 2 (2008): 181–192, 183. Similarly, Hays, “The Scrip-

A. Situating this Study

5

erase his many years of scriptural study but reconfigures that study in light of the crucified and resurrected Christ. Paul’s proclamation of the gospel is not, nor can it be, divorced from the faithful God who is encountered in the pages of Israel’s sacred texts. Instead, there is in Paul’s thought an ever-flowing interrelationship between scripture and gospel. Paul uses scripture to interpret his world, and Paul reads scripture through the lens of the cross and the circumstances of his mission. As Watson rightly observes, Paul never stops learning from scripture.12 The revelation of the risen Christ challenges him to revisit the sacred texts again and again. Watson contends, “The Christ Paul encounters is one who has died and been raised according to the scriptures (cf. 1 Cor 15:3–4), and what is encountered in Christ is therefore the true sense of scripture.”13 What God has accomplished through Christ is Paul’s interpretive key to explain how God is rectifying the world and to understand how this same God has been acting faithfully for generations. This relationship between scripture and gospel in Paul’s thought world, however, is inseparable from Paul’s mission.14 Paul utilizes scripture in his communication with Gentile churches.15 In this letter to the Corinthians, scripture, read through the lens of the cross, is a key piece of the theological matrix informing Paul’s advice to this fledgling community. Paul believes that God is moving and working among the Gentile believers (14:25). The letter reveals their real struggles to wed their new faith with their daily lives (e.g. 5:1–13; 6:1–11; 7:1–40; 8:1–13; 10:23–11:1). Paul uses scripture to teach them how to be the church of God. In Israel’s sacred stories, particularly the exodus tradition (5:6–8; 10:1–22), Paul finds ready examples to com-

tures of Israel were embedded deeply in his [Paul’s] bones,” Conversion of the Imagination, 143. 12 Watson, “Scripture in Pauline Theology,” 191. 13 Watson, “Scripture in Pauline Theology,” 191. 14 Wagner, Heralds of the Good News, 1–5. 15 Although direct scriptural quotations are missing in 1 Thessalonians, Philippians, and Philemon, the case can be made that there are scriptural concepts or allusions undergirding Paul’s arguments in 1 Thessalonians and Philippians. For example, see M. D. Hooker, “Adam Redivivus: Philippians 2 Once More,” in The Old Testament in the New Testament: Essays in Honor of J. L. North (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 2000), 220–234; J. A. D. Weima, “1 and 2 Thessalonians,” in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old, ed. G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007), 871–890; M. Silva, “Galatians,” in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old; 785–812; E. Springs Steele, “The Use of Jewish Scriptures in 1 Thessalonians,” Biblical Theology Bulletin 14 (1984): 12–17; Ronilick E. K. Mchami, “Paul’s Use of the Instruction of the Mosaic Law in his Paraenesis: 1 Thessalonians 4:1–8,” Africa Theological Journal 29 (2006): 74–90; Craig E. Evans, “Ascending and Descending with a Shout: Psalm 47:6 and 1 Thess 4:16” in Paul and the Scriptures of Israel, ed. C. E. Evans and J. A. Sanders (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1993), 238–53.

6

Introduction

municate the need for the Corinthians to take seriously their new identity as God’s church. The interrelationship between scripture, gospel, and mission leads to the second insight that has shaped this study: Scripture informs Paul’s understanding of how the “church of God” should live.16 In 1 Cor 10:11, Paul writes that Scripture has been written for the instruction of the church, and in Rom 15:4 he makes a similar claim: “For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that by steadfastness and by the encouragement of the scriptures we might have hope.” In these passages, Paul himself acknowledges the critical role that scripture plays in the formation of these communities who are called together by God for the proclamation of the gospel. By using 1 Corinthians 5–7 as a test case, Brian Rosner has persuasively argued that Israel’s scriptures are a “crucial and formative source for Paul’s ethics.”17 Scripture has shaped how Paul perceives the world, God, and the rest of humanity. It has informed a fundamental part of his identity. Scripture has taught him what it means to be a child of God, and the language of scripture gives him the vocabulary to instruct the church how to be people of God. This book expands the conversation about Paul’s use of scripture in two ways. First, more work needs to be done on Paul’s use of Israel’s stories. Most of the recent studies have focused on Paul’s citations, his Vorlage, and the rhetoric of scriptural quotations in Paul’s letters.18 The present work focuses on Paul’s employment of Israel’s exodus traditions. Sylvia Keesmaat has already made important strides in this area in her extensive study of potential exodus traditions influencing Paul’s arguments in Romans 8 and Galatians. 19 In her book, Paul and His Story, Keesmaat notes the significance of the exodus tradition in Israel’s scriptures and uses tradition theory to help interpret ways in which adaptations occur in traditions to make them relevant

16

For an excellent overview of the consideration of scripture in the study of Pauline ethics and a lengthy list of those who reject in the influence of scripture in Paul’s admonition, see Brian S. Rosner, Paul, Scripture, and Ethics: A Study of 1 Corinthians 5–7, Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 22 (Leiden: Brill, 1994), 1–15. See also Hays, The Conversion of the Imagination, 1–24, 143–162; idem, Echoes, 158–159. 17 Rosner, Paul, Scripture, and Ethics, 24. 18 For a thorough overview see Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture, 8–28. 19 Her study particularly concerns Rom 8:14–39 and the pattern of the exodus in Galatians (especially important for her argument are Gal 4:1–6 and 6:15), Keesmaat, Paul and His Story. Others have devoted articles or sections of books to this topic. See, for example, W. D. Davies, “Paul and the Exodus,” in Christian Engagements with Judaism (Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1999), 123–126.

A. Situating this Study

7

to each new generation. 20 My investigation makes extensive use of her insights on living traditions.21 By examining appearances of the exodus in canonical and non-canonical Jewish writings, Keesmaat assembles a large number of texts to form a scriptural matrix within which to compare Paul’s vocabulary and imagery to the vocabulary, imagery, and themes often found in rehearsals of Israel’s exodus tradition. In her comparison she has chosen Hays’s intertextual approach.22 Keesmaat is careful to maintain that Paul may have been alluding to some passages intentionally while other allusions may have arisen out of an intertextual matrix which informed his cultural consciousness and which he echoed almost unconsciously.23 Ultimately, she finds that Paul reinterprets the exodus tradition in ways that are both continuous and discontinuous with the exodus tradition, yet she concludes that this scriptural story – reconfigured in light of Christ – is critical to shaping Paul’s thought.24 Keesmaat’s work has much to commend it, although her method has been subject to the same criticisms leveled at Hays’s intertextual approach. Chiefly, her work has been criticized for finding too many echoes of the exodus in Romans 8 and Galatians with little evidence in the context of the proposed echo to support the allusion.25 However, Keesmaat’s overall project demonstrates that more attention needs to be granted to the role of Israel’s stories in Paul’s rhetoric. Part of the dilemma of studying Paul’s allusions to scriptural stories is defining what constitutes an allusion.26 In the most basic terms, allusion is a type of “literary borrowing” or “(1) a species of reference that (2) refers, 20

For the importance of traditions in shaping culture see Edward Shils, Tradition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981), 328–330; George Allan, The Importances of the Past: A Meditation on the Authority of Tradition (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1986), 237; cf. Clifford Geertz, Interpretation of Cultures (New York: Basic Books, 1973), 46, 49, 140 with reference to organizing “symbols.” 21 See Chapter One. 22 Hays, Echoes, 1–33. 23 Keesmaat, 34–53, esp. p. 50. 24 She cites Gal 6:15 as a particularly subversive feature of Paul’s reinvention of the exodus, and she concludes that the Romans and the Galatians are each handling Israel’s traditions in a different way. In Romans, Keesmaat argues that Paul is countering an abandonment of tradition while in Galatians he must challenge those who cling to Israel’s traditions without adapting them in light of Christ (223–231). 25 See Bruce W. Longenecker, review of Sylvia Keesmaat, Paul and His Story, Evangelical Quarterly 73 (2001): 351–53; Brad Eastman, review of Sylvia Keesmaat, Paul and His Story, Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 30 (2001): 106–07. 26 The lines between allusion and echo are blurred by multiple definitions of these terms. For example, according to Hays (Echoes, 14–21), “allusion” and “echo” are virtually interchangeable, yet Porter makes a rigid distinction between the terms (“Allusions and Echoes,” in As It Is Written: Studying Paul’s Use of Scripture, ed. S. E. Porter and C. D Stanley [Atlanta: SBL, 2008], 40).

8

Introduction

covertly or not, by (3) borrowing.”27 In the present work, I will study texts where Paul explicitly employs exodus imagery. 28 In both passages, Paul uses specific references that are associated with Israel’s exodus traditions. In 10:1–22, Paul openly alludes to details of the tradition that he urges the Corinthians to hear as instruction (10:6, 11). In 10:7, he warns against idolatry by introducing a citation of Exodus 32 with an introductory formula (“as it is written”). Furthermore, Paul employs details of the exodus tradition without rehearsing the context of the story. For example, in 10:6–11, he lists the death of twenty-three thousand in a single day (10:8), the destruction by serpents (10:9), and the grumbling of the Israelites (10:10). In the concise allusion in chapter 5, Paul does not cite scripture, but he does use the term πάσχα, a term only used in reference to Israel’s Passover, and he includes imagery related to the observance of the Feast of Unleavened Bread and Passover. Surrounding the reference to πάσχα are the commands to remove leaven (5:6) and to celebrate the feast (5:8). In sum, by claiming that Paul is alluding to the exodus in 1 Cor 5:6–8 and 10:1–22, I am employing various forms of the term “allusion” (or “alluding”) to claim that Paul is overtly evoking a previously formed tradition in a new literary context. In the following chapters, we will discuss the rhetorical effect of Paul’s use of these traditions in their new literary setting. The goal of this book is not to identify the source(s) of all possible allusions to Israel’s exodus. Rather, by looking at two passages in 1 Corinthians that are generally recognized as exodus allusions (1 Cor 5:6–8 and 10:1–22), this project is interested in the larger picture of how Paul’s overall appeal to Israel’s exodus functions in his argument. As Steven DiMattei observes, “Paul does not simply narrate the past; he also reshapes it, retelling the story and often interjecting elements and themes drawn from the context of the contemporary situation to which the narrative is being applied.”29 Paul’s arguments in 1 Cor 5:6–8 and 10:1–22 allude to Israel’s exodus traditions, and Paul uses this allusion to formulate his instruction to the community. The goal of this book is to determine how Paul’s use of Israel’s exodus tradition shapes the apostle’s instruction to this Gentile church and teaches the Corinthians how to belong to Christ and thus to belong to God. In the process, it will be necessary to examine possible allusions to specific pieces of exodus tradition, but with the objective of determining which elements of the story are being highlighted by Paul. These two passages in 1 Corinthians, 27 Joseph Pucci, The Full-Knowing Reader: Allusion and the Power of the Reader in the Western Literary Tradition (New Haven: Yale, 1998), 6. 28 There is no need to argue that the exodus tradition is significant for Paul in 1 Corinthians because he explicitly appeals to it twice. Similarly, see also Peter E. Enns, review of Sylvia Keesmaat, Paul and His Story, Bulletin for Biblical Research 10 (2000): 151–53. 29 Steven DiMattei, “Biblical Narratives,” in As It Is Written, 81.

A. Situating this Study

9

where there are allusions to exodus traditions, offer examples of how Israel’s exodus tradition informed Paul’s argument and inspired his instruction to this predominately Gentile community. Focusing the study in 1 Corinthians will also contribute to the conversation of about Paul’s use of Israel’s scripture in this particular letter.30 Though numerous articles have been published,31 John Paul Heil’s study stands out as 30 Rosner, Paul, Scripture, and Ethics; B. J. Oropeza, Paul and Apostasy, WUNT 115 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000); Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture, 185–215; Peter J. Tomson, Paul and the Jewish Law: Halakah in the Letters of the Apostle to the Gentiles (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990); C. Marvin Pate, The Reverse of the Curse: Paul, Wisdom, and the Law, WUNT 114 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000), 296–304; H. H. Drake Williams, The Wisdom of the Wise: The Presence and Function of Scripture within 1 Cor. 1:19–3:23, AGJU 49 (Leiden: Brill, 2001); Dietrich-Alex Koch, Die Schrift als Zeuge des Evangeliums: Untersuchungen zur Verwendung und zum Verständnis der Schrift bei Paulus, Beiträge zur historischen Theologie 69 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1986); Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989); Aageson, James W. Written Also for Our Sake: Paul and the Art of Biblical Interpretation (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1993); Romano Penna, “Paul’s Attitude Toward the Old Testament,” in Paul the Apostle: Wisdom and Folly of the Cross, Theological and Exegetical Study 2 (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1996), 61–91; E. Earle Ellis, Paul’s Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1981); H. Ulonska, ‘Die Funktion der alttestamentlichen Zitate und Anspielungen in den paulinischen Briefen’ (Ph.D. diss., Münster, 1964); Robert Bruce Hughes. “Textual and Hermeneutical Aspects of Paul’s Use of the Old Testament in 1 and 2 Corinthians.” (Ph.D. Diss., University of Edinburgh, 1978). 31 A sampling of these articles include François S. Malan, “The Use of the Old Testament in 1 Corinthians,” Neotestamentica 14 (1981): 134–170; Raymond F. Collins, “‘It Was Indeed Written for Our Sake’ (1 Cor 9,10): Paul’s Use of Scripture in the First Letter to the Corinthians,” Studien zum Neuen Testament und seiner Umwelt 20 (1995): 151– 170; Andreas Lindemann, “Die Schrift als Tradition: Beobachtungen zu den biblischen Zitaten im Ersten Korintherbrief,” in Schrift und Tradition: Festschrift für Josef Ernst zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. Knut Backhaus and Franz Georg Untergassmair (Paderborn: Schöningh, 1996), 199–225; Thomas L. Brodie, “The Systematic Use of the Pentateuch in 1 Corinthians,” in The Corinthian Correspondence, ed. R. Bieringer (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1996), 441–457; C. J. A. Hickling, “Paul’s Use of Exodus,” in Corinthian Correspondence, 367–76; J. K. Howard, “‘Christ Our Passover’: A Study of the Passover-Exodus Theme in 1 Corinthians,” EvQ 41 (1969): 97–108; Richard Hays, “The Conversion of the Imagination: Scripture and Eschatology in 1 Corinthians,” New Testament Studies 45 (1999): 391–412; repr. in Conversion of the Imagination (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 1–24; Jan Lambrecht, “Paul’s Christological Use of Scripture in 1 Cor 15:20–28,” NTS 28 (1982): 502–27; Peter S. Zaas, “‘Cast Out the Evil Man from Your Midst’ (1 Cor 5:13b),” Journal of Biblical Literature 103 (1984): 259–267; David E. Lanier, “With Stammering Lips and Another Tongue: 1 Cor 14:20–22 and Isa 28:11–12,” Criswell Theological Review 5 (1991): 259–85; Bart J. Koet, “The Background to 1 Cor 10,7–8,” in Corinthian Correspondence, 607–615; Brian S. Rosner, “The Function of Scripture in 1 Cor 5,13b and 6,16,” in Bieringer, Corinthian Correspondence, 513–518; idem, “‘No Other Gods’ The Jealousy of God and Religious Pluralism,” in One God, One

10

Introduction

the first monograph exclusively devoted to the extensive examination of Paul’s use of scripture throughout 1 Corinthians.32 Though he does acknowledge allusions, his work is focused on Paul’s rhetorical use of explicit citations. As a result, his discussion of Paul’s use of exodus imagery is rather limited. The second conversation engaged by this study is the interlocking significance of community formation and identity. Margaret Mitchell has persuasively demonstrated that Paul’s overall concern in 1 Corinthians is to foster unity in the congregation. Mitchell writes, “1 Corinthians is throughout an argument for ecclesial unity.”33 Judging from the behavior censured by Paul in this letter, some in the community are not aware that being in the church should change the way they view themselves, their peers, or their world. 34 Mitchell argues that Paul makes use of deliberative rhetoric to combat the Corinthians’ factionalism. As Mitchell’s work has highlighted, Paul’s appeal for unity at the beginning of the letter (1:10) reverberates in imagery throughout the letter in language of the one bread (10:17), for instance, or the one body (10:17; 12:12–27). In a footnote at the beginning of the book she states, “Paul’s rhetorical stance throughout 1 Cor is to argue that Christian unity is the theological and sociological expectation from which the Corinthians have fallen short, and to which they must return.” 35 Since Mitchell identifies the decisive problem at Corinth as factionalism, her project does not develop the so-called “theological expectation” as much as it insightfully analyzes Paul’s argument for the “sociological expectation” of a unified community.36 Though she recognizes a theological component, her arguments focus on the common good (τὸ συµφέρον) “as that which ‘builds up’ the community (10:23).”37 Mitchell’s work is to be commended for display-

Lord: Christianity in a World of Religious Pluralism, ed. A. D. Clarke and B. W. Winter (Grand Rapids: Paternoster, 1992), 149–159; idem, ‘Drive out the wicked person’: A Biblical Theology of Exclusion,” EvQ 71 (1999): 25–36; Joop F. M. Smit, “‘You Shall Not Muzzle a Threshing Ox’: Paul’s Use of the Law of Moses in 1 Cor 9,8–12,” Estudios bíblicos 58 (2000): 239–263. Many studies have been done of the exodus imagery in 2 Cor 3. Most of them have focused particularly on the spirit/letter dichotomy. For an overview see Scott J. Hafemann, Paul, Moses, and the History of Israel: The Letter/Spirit Contrast and the Argument from Scripture in 2 Corinthians 3 (Bletchley: Paternoster, 2005), 2–29. See also Hays, Echoes, 122–153. 32 John Paul Heil, The Rhetorical Role of Scripture in 1 Corinthians, Studies in Biblical Literature 15 (Atlanta: SBL, 2005). 33 Mitchell, Rhetoric of Reconciliation, 1. 34 See John M. G. Barclay, "Thessalonica and Corinth: Social Contrasts in Pauline Christianity," Journal for the Study of the New Testament 47 (1992): 49–74. 35 Mitchell, Rhetoric of Reconciliation, 1, n1. 36 Mitchell, Rhetoric of Reconciliation, 2. 37 Mitchell, Rhetoric of Reconciliation, 146.

A. Situating this Study

11

ing the coherence of Paul’s argument throughout this letter and for revealing the power of Paul’s pleas for unity. This study weds more closely Mitchell’s concepts of “theological” and “sociological” expectation. As Mitchell herself, I believe, would agree, Paul is not calling the Corinthians to be unified for unity’s sake. Factionalism surfaces as a key problem throughout 1 Corinthians, but factionalism itself is not the underlying issue. Factionalism is the most vexing symptom displayed by the Corinthian believers who have not allowed the word of the cross to alter their perception of one another and their place in the world. Paul begins to combat the divisions in the church by reminding them of the foolish story of the cross that has fashioned their community (1:18–2:5). The Corinthians, however, have proven themselves rather immature. They are just babes in Christ who have not yet learned to live by the Spirit: “For you are still fleshly people, for where there is among you jealousy and strive, are you not fleshly and living like ordinary folks?” (3:3). Paul expects the gospel to change the believers’ behavior. For Paul, the church’s existence and behavior are only possible due to the Spirit “which is from God” (2:12). The sociological reality is only made possible by divine activity. Furthermore, Paul must remind the Corinthians that who they are in Christ has direct bearing on how they live (5:1–13). In 5:7, Paul will tell the Corinthians to be who they really are. The Corinthians are the “church of God” (1:2; 10:32; 11:22; 15:9), and Paul has to challenge them not only to be unified but in that unity to glorify God with their actions (10:31). This label, “the church of God,” reminds the Corinthians that they are no longer a people who are led astray by mute idols (12:2). Now, they are a group called by God (1:2). According to Judith Lieu, This, the creation, at least rhetorically, of a self-conscious and distinctive identity is a remarkable characteristic of early Christianity from our earliest sources; indeed it is inseparable from the appearance of those sources and from Christianity’s equally characteristic literary creativity.38

Already there is evidence that the church is becoming a distinctive body with some communal boundaries. The formation of communal boundaries can be seen in glimpses throughout the letter. Throughout 1 Corinthians, as elsewhere, Paul employs familial imagery to speak of the believers as brothers and sisters and even to liken himself to their father (4:15) and mother (3:1– 2).39 In 14:22–25, for instance, the act of believing clearly distinguishes the insiders from “unbelievers” or those “outside.”40 Moreover, in 1 Cor 5:1–13, 38

Judith Lieu, Neither Jew nor Greek: Constructing Early Christianity (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2002), 171. 39 Regarding Paul’s motherly imagery in 1 Cor 3:1–3, see Beverly Roberts Gaventa, Our Mother Saint Paul (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2007), 41–50. 40 See also 1 Cor 6:1–11.

12

Introduction

Paul expresses concern that the church’s tolerance of a man’s inappropriate relationship with his stepmother has corrupted the community. There he employs the imagery of leaven and appeals to the purity of Passover to encourage the community to purge itself of “malice and evil” (5:8). The apostle urges the believers to bear witness to God’s holiness in a world where they regularly associate with the “immoral” or “outsiders” (5:9–13). This community formation occurs within the larger context of the Corinthians’ connection to a network of other communities whom Paul also calls the “church of God.” In the beginning of the letter, Paul reminds the Corinthians that they are called to be saints “together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours” (1:2b). Likewise, in 11:1–16, after giving practical instruction regarding women’s appearance while praying and prophesying, Paul explains that he gives the same instruction to all the “churches of God.”41 At the end of the letter, the “churches of Asia” send their greetings along with the house church of Aquila and Prisca and all the brothers (16:19–20). These references to other assemblies serve to remind the Corinthians that they are not alone in their struggles. There are other communities who have also professed faith in Christ and who are also learning what it means to be followers of a crucified and resurrected Jewish Messiah in their Roman world. In 1 Cor 5:6–8 and 10:1–22, Paul employs Israel’s exodus story, reinterpreted through the cross, to teach the Corinthians how to live according to their new identity in Christ.

B. Paul and the Corinthian Congregation as Readers of Scripture B. Paul and the Corinthians as Readers of Scripture

This project builds upon one key presupposition: The Corinthians have some basic knowledge of Israel’s scriptures, particularly of Israel’s exodus. What can be inferred from the use of scripture is that the implied readers, the ideal audience to whom the implied author writes,42 have some regard for scripture and have, at the minimum, general knowledge of scriptural narratives like the exodus.43 41

Consider also 1 Cor 14:33b–36. R. Alan Culpepper defines the implied reader as the “one who performs all the mental moves required to enter into the narrative world and respond to it as the implied author intends” (Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983], 7). Culpepper is writing this in regard to narrative literature, but the insights for the implied authorial audience apply here nicely. Paul, the implied author, writes with certain assumptions regarding the knowledge of his audience. 43 Even two of the most cautious voices in this debate regarding the audience’s knowledge of Israel’s scriptures, Christopher Stanley and Christopher Tuckett, both allow some knowledge of larger narratives like the exodus or creation. See Christopher Tuckett, 42

B. Paul and the Corinthians as Readers of Scripture

13

This may seem like a bold presupposition. To be sure, the audience implied by this letter is predominantly Gentile (6:11; 12:2). Paul does not assume that the Gentile audience had a strong background in Israel’s scriptures before conversion.44 In fact, he addresses the whole community in 12:2 as those who were formerly led astray by mute idols (12:2) and includes “idolaters” among the vices listed in 6:9–10 that formerly characterized some of them. If the readers implied by the letter were Gentiles who were previously devoted to other gods, then what evidence is there to support the assumption that the implied audience had some general, albeit limited, knowledge of scripture or even that this audience held scripture in high regard? In spite of the Corinthians’ implied background, the author does evoke a fair number of scripture citations45 in this letter and makes extended allusions to the exodus narrative in his correspondence with this community (1 Cor 10:1–22; cf. 2 Cor 3:4–18). In the case of the allusions to exodus traditions in 1 Cor 5:6–8 and 10:1–22, the first instance is rather brief and the second quite lengthy. Yet in neither case is an explanation offered for these allusions nor is general background provided to help the audience make the link to Israel’s exodus traditions. Instead, the author assumes that the reader will have the basic knowledge needed to make these allusions intelligible. What type of audience is anticipated by these general allusions to scripture? According to reader-response criticism, neither the “real” author nor the “real” audience is met in the pages of a given text.46 Instead, only the implied author or implied audience is presented, and the relationship of these implied figures to their actual counterparts may only be revealed through “Paul, Scripture and Ethics: Some Reflections,” NTS 46 (2000): 403–24; Stanley, Arguing with Scripture, 76. 44 The authorship stated by the text includes Sosthenes as a co-sender. However, clues in the letter itself suggest the voice of Paul only in the formation of the letter. Note, for instance, the use of the first person singular pronoun throughout (e.g., 1 Cor 1: 13–17; 3:5– 10; 4:14–21; 7:8; 9:1–27; 16:5–24) and the recognition at the end that the letter was written by Paul (16:21). 45 The following are the citations and traditions treated by Heil, The Rhetorical Role of Scripture in 1 Corinthians: 1 Cor 1:19, 31; 2:9, 16a; 3:19b–20; 5:13b; 6:16b; 9:9–10; 10:7b, 26; 11:7–12; 14:21, 25; 15:25, 27, 32b, 45a, 54b–55. Although Heil’s focus is 10:7b, he does have a brief treatment of the scriptural allusions in 10:6–11 (p. 150–58), but he does not develop these allusions to the extent he does for the “obvious and prominent references to the scriptures” in 1 Cor 11:7–12, which receive the attention of an entire chapter (173); cf. the list of citations that fit the criteria of Stanley’s method (Paul and the Language of Scripture, 33–37): 1 Cor 1:19, 31; 2:9; 3:19, 20; 6:16; 9:9 (9:10); 10:7; 14:21; 15:27a, 45, 54–55. The disputed citations, therefore, include: 2:16; 5:13b; 10:26; 14:25; 15:25, 32, 33. See also Stanley, Arguing with Scripture, 78–96. 46 Stanley, Arguing with Scripture, 63. See also Walter Ong, “The Writer’s Audience Is Always a Fiction,” in Interfaces of the Word (Ithaca: Cornell Univesity Press, 1977), 53– 81; Culpepper, Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel, 7.

14

Introduction

extensive historical investigation, if they may ever be revealed at all.47 Based on this premise of reader-response criticism, Stanley has framed a method for profiling Paul’s diverse implied readers. If Paul’s hypothetical readers could be viewed on a spectrum, on one end would be readers who fail to grasp Paul’s use of scripture, disregard Paul’s apostolic authority, discount the authority of scripture, or disagree and thus reject Paul’s use of scripture altogether.48 On the other end of the spectrum would fall hypothetical readers with completely opposite characteristics—accepting Paul’s authority, upholding the authority of scripture, following his scriptural arguments, and heeding his advice. According to Stanley, this hypothetical group is the ideal implied audience of Paul’s letters.49 Hays, for instance, assumes this ideal model when he concludes, “the implied readers of these letters appear to be primarily Gentile Christians with an extensive knowledge of the LXX and an urgent interest in its interpretation.”50 In reality, though, Stanley wisely cautions that all the actual readers in this congregation may not fit this profile. Those few who would be capable of grasping the nuances of Paul’s argument and filling in the biblical background Stanley labels the “informed audience.”51 In comparison, the reader who understands enough scripture to follow Paul’s argument, but who is not necessarily able to recall the background of the passage, is the “competent audience.” Stanley lumps many of the Corinthians into this category. Though it is certainly possible that Paul was mistaken about what the Corinthians knew, we should probably give him the benefit of the doubt unless the evidence indicates otherwise. Thus, when Paul refers in passing to a biblical story or character without explanation, we can presume that he is relying on earlier teaching that he expects them to recall. In most cases the point of the argument would be lost without this knowledge.52

Stanley then proceeds to cite 1 Cor 10:1–10 as a clear example where Paul assumes the audience’s familiarity with the exodus traditions to which he alludes. According to Stanley, “if they had never heard of the exodus story, his brief allusions would have made no sense.”53 More specifically, Francis Watson persuasively argues that the Corinthians needed some level of 47

Stanley, Arguing with Scripture, 63. Stanley, Arguing with Scripture, 66. 49 Stanley, Arguing with Scripture, 67. 50 Hays, Echoes, 29. 51 Considering the relatively low literacy rates in the broader culture, it is fair to assume that only a small percentage of this church would have been literate. According to Gamble, the majority of early Christians were illiterate. Harry Y. Gamble, Books and Readers in the Early Church: A History of Early Christian Texts (New Haven: Yale University, 1995), 2–11. See also Pieter J. J. Botha, “Greco-Roman Literacy as Setting for New Testament Writings,” Neot 26 (1992): 195–215. 52 Stanley, Arguing with Scripture, 75. 53 Stanley, Arguing with Scripture, 76. 48

B. Paul and the Corinthians as Readers of Scripture

15

knowledge concerning the golden calf incident in Exodus 32 in order for Paul’s brief citation in 10:7 to make sense: “Only a knowledge of the original context can fill in the gap between a warning against idolatry and a scriptural text, that, apart from its context, merely seems to speak of some unspecified festive occasion.”54 Though Stanley maintains that Paul expects the audience “to have a fairly broad knowledge of the exodus story,”55 he does not believe that all in the “real” church would have actually had this knowledge. These less competent hearers would have fit into Stanley’s final category of reader competence, the “minimal audience,” who lack knowledge of the content of Israel’s scriptures and who require help to follow arguments that make extensive use of scripture.56 Surely, those who had recently converted from a life of following after mute idols (12:2) would not have extensive knowledge of Jewish scriptures. It is problematic, however, to assume that a minimally competent audience could not become more knowledgeable with the repetitive hearing of a letter and with the instruction of church leaders who would be present. Based on 1 Corinthians, it seems that Paul allows for a diversity of understanding among the hearers of this letter and a diversity of roles in the edification of the congregation. Paul characterizes some in the congregation as leaders (3:1–4:1), urges the Corinthians to listen to others who have presumably grown in the faith since their conversion (16:15–18), and recognizes many gifts in this church, among which are apostles, prophets, and teachers (12:28).57 Furthermore, it appears that the Corinthians have studied previous letters and have asked clarifying questions (5:9; 7:1). Thus, it is likely that Paul’s letters were read and reread in the life of the congregation.58 With the aid of teachers or prophets, the explanations offered by the letter carriers (16:15–18), and the probability of the letters being read more than once, even the most minimally competent audience would have had the opportunity to mature in its competency.59

54

Watson, “Scripture in Pauline Theology,” 187. Stanley, Arguing with Scripture, 76. 56 Stanley, Arguing with Scripture, 69. 57 Consider 1 Cor 12:10; 14:37–40. 58 Margaret M. Mitchell calls interpreters to take seriously the Corinthian correspondence as the birth of Pauline hermeneutics. In this correspondence one can see Paul writing and rewriting, reading and rereading, his words and rhetoric in light of ongoing conversation, misunderstanding, and conflict with the Corinthian church (Paul, the Corinthians and the Birth of Christian Hermeneutics [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010], esp. 1–17). 59 See Wagner, Heralds of the Good News, 36–39. Cf. Stanley, “Paul’s ‘Use’ of Scripture: Why the Audience Matters,” in As It Is Written, 140–143, who argues adamantly against this assertion. Stanley contends that only a small percentage would have been 55

16

Introduction

Paul assumes the Corinthians’ basic familiarity with Israel’s exodus traditions and is fully aware that some in the congregation would have had more knowledge of Israel’s scriptures than others. According to Stanley, “in the case of the Galatians and Corinthians, whom he knew firsthand, we can assume that Paul was aware of the audience’s diverse capabilities and attempted to frame his quotations accordingly.”60 Given the centrality of scripture to Paul’s arguments in 1 Cor 10:1–22 and 1 Cor 5:1–13, Paul would be grossly overestimating the probable effectiveness of his rhetorical strategy if the Corinthians lack all knowledge of Israel’s exodus or paschal traditions. It is likely that Paul has previously given the Corinthians some basic instruction in Israel’s scriptures or at least in some traditions of Israel’s history and that Paul is expecting them to recall his earlier teaching61 or to have progressed in their own reflection since he has left them. In sum, in 1 Cor 5:6–8 and 10:1–22, Paul is assuming that the Corinthians will recognize his allusions to the Passover and to Israel’s exodus, including Israel’s infidelity to the Lord during the wilderness wanderings. Some in the congregation will undoubtedly have more knowledge than others. There is no reason to assume that all in the congregation would have been biblically literate. For Paul’s arguments to work, however, some needed to be able to fill in the gaps that Paul’s rhetoric creates. The apostle must have believed that there were some who not only had the ability to do so but who had the authority and the opportunity to share their knowledge with others. Based upon this key presupposition, this book argues that Paul freely uses scripture as a source of his own teaching and instruction and invites the Corinthians to find in Israel’s sacred texts their own story, a story bound to a faithful and jealous God. The Corinthians cannot flirt with idolatry or take the so-called gods of their city lightly (8:1–13; 10:14–22). Furthermore, the socalled “knowledgeable” must beware of the needs of their brothers and sisters and refrain from any action that leads others back to their former lives of idolatry (8:10–13). Based on Paul’s use of exodus traditions in 1 Corinthians 10:1–22, the consequences of unfaithfulness can be dire, both for those who engage in the appearance of idolatry and for the weak who might be encouraged to follow their example. Likewise, in 1 Cor 5:6–8, Paul uses paschal traditions to encourage the Corinthians to be the holy people whom God has called them to be. Being “unleavened” requires that the Corinthians hold those inside the church accountable for their behavior. The church must exhibit a community that has been washed, sanctified, and justified by God (6:11). Ultimately, in both 1 Cor 5:6–8 and 10:1–22, Paul’s use of exodus capable of teaching others and that social distinctions would have formed barriers to those of the lower classes finding time to sit and to be instructed by the literate elite. 60 Stanley, Arguing with Scripture, 65. 61 See Stanley, Arguing with Scripture, 75.

C. An Overview

17

traditions reveals the need for the Corinthians to live as a community who seeks to bring glory and honor to God (6:20; 10:31), because they are a church whose very existence depends on God (1:30).

C. An Overview C. An Overview

In 1 Cor 5:6–8 and 10:1–22, Paul appeals to Israel’s exodus traditions to instruct the Corinthians how to be the “church of God” in Corinth. Chapter One highlights Corinth’s robust religious landscape and the need for instruction to know how to live faithfully. The plurality of the Corinthians’ religious experience has poorly prepared them to follow a jealous God (10:22; cf. 12:2). The Corinthians have professed belief in the gospel (15:1–2), but they struggle to understand that their identity as a people is intertwined with one God and one Lord (8:6). To educate the Corinthians about the character of this God, Paul appeals to a foundational narrative of Israel, the exodus story, but he interprets this narrative through the lens of the cross and the hope of the resurrection. As demonstrated in the following chapters, in Paul’s use of the exodus imagery in 1 Corinthians is the interweaving of two origin stories: the origin of Israel and the origin of the church. This creative merger between the word of the cross and the story of the exodus produces a lesson on God’s faithfulness and a reminder that the Corinthians’ identity as a church is bound to a jealous God. Paul appeals to the exodus in two sections of this letter. The lengthiest use of exodus traditions occurs in 10:1–22. Due to the extensiveness of this allusion, 1 Cor 10:1–22 will be examined first. This examination will divide the text into two parts: 10:1–13 (Chapter Two) and 10:14–22 (Chapter Three). Chapter Two examines how Paul adapts Israel’s exodus to reflect the situation of the Corinthians, how Paul uses the ancestral transgressions to teach the church, and what the Corinthians are supposed to learn about God from these examples. After Paul has linked two groups of people who owe their existence to God—the ancestors and the Corinthians—he demonstrates the perilous situation of the Corinthians through multiple examples of unfaithfulness exhibited by the ancestors in 10:6–10. Paul admonishes the Corinthians to avoid these mistakes by trusting in their faithful God. The second part (Chapter Three) applies lessons from Israel’s exodus to the Corinthians’ dilemma of eating food that has been sacrificed to idols (8:1–13). This issue is not merely dividing the “weak” from the “knowledgeable.” The controversy is indicative of the Corinthians’ struggle to live into their status as the church of God. In 10:14, Paul urges them to flee from idolatry. To bolster his warning Paul reminds the Corinthians of their partnership in Christ as exhibited in the eucharist (vv 16–17) and appeals to the bond created with the divine by eating before an altar (vv 18–20). Finally, in

18

Introduction

10:21–22, he gives one final warning of the dire consequences of provoking the Lord to jealousy. The other appeal to exodus traditions in this letter is found in 5:6–8. Chapter Four is devoted to the brief reference to exodus traditions in this passage. In 1 Cor 5:7, Paul equates Christ with the πάσχα, and in 5:6 he alludes to the preparation for the festival. These brief allusions might be overlooked or be chalked up to a possible pre-formed tradition that equates Christ’s death with the Passover. After studying the function of Paul’s exodus imagery in 1 Corinthians 10, however, it is apparent that the appeal to this imagery in 1 Corinthians 5 similarly adds urgency to Paul’s admonitions to the Corinthian believers to be who they really are (5:7). As Paul employs exodus imagery in chapter 10 to correct the church’s behavior, so Paul alludes to paschal imagery in 5:6–8 to change the Corinthians’ behavior. By equating Christ with the πάσχα and by using feast imagery to instruct the church, Paul urges the Corinthians to be the distinctive people God has called them to be. Since this letter would have been read and heard in one setting, however, with the instructions in chapter 5 preceding those of chapter 10, in the conclusion it will be necessary to ask how the lessons of 10:1–22 echo the warnings of 5:6–8. Before examining the text of 1 Corinthians, however, it is first necessary to turn attention to the exodus as a story for instruction, which is the focus of Chapter One.

Chapter One

God and the So-Called Gods: Teaching the Corinthians to be the “Church of God” For though there are many so-called gods either in heaven or upon the earth, so there are many gods and many lords, but for us there is one God the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for him and there is one Lord Jesus Christ through whom are all things and we exist through him. 1 Cor 8:5–6

The Apostle Paul had the formidable task of teaching the Corinthians how to be faithful to an exclusive God.1 The Corinthians live in an environment that honors multiple gods, goddesses, and rulers. Some of the dilemmas facing this church illustrate the believers’ struggles to discern how the gospel of a jealous God should impact their behavior (e.g., 1 Cor 5:1–13; 6:1–11; 8:1– 13). Since the Corinthians live in an environment that is saturated with other so-called gods and lords, it is not surprising that the converts would have to learn how to be faithful followers of Christ. In 1 Cor 8:5–6, Paul acknowledges two different perceptions of the divine in the Corinthian church: one that fears the power of many gods and lords and another that acknowledges the existence of only one God and one Lord. Moreover, the dilemma of eating food that is sacrificed to idols (1 Cor 8:1–11:1) illustrates the difficulty of determining which activities constitute idolatrous behavior. Into this confusion, Paul attempts to infuse some clarity. In Israel’s exodus traditions Paul finds powerful examples to instruct the Corinthians how to live as the church of God in Corinth. In 1 Cor 5:6–8 and 10:1–22, Paul employs allusions to Israel’s exodus to teach the Corinthians that, through Christ, they have been united to a faithful and jealous God. It is evident that the Corinthians live in an environment that 1 Paul’s tools for instructing the Corinthians are widely diverse. The Corinthian correspondence reveals that the apostle has penned multiple letters to this community (1 Cor 5:9; 2 Cor 2:1–4; 7:6–13), has visited them personally beyond his initial proclamation of the gospel (2 Cor 2:1–4; cf. 1 Cor 16:5–9; 2 Cor 1:15–2:4), has sent co-workers on his behalf (1 Cor 4:17; 16:5–12; 2 Cor 7:6–13; 8:16–24), has welcomed emissaries from the Corinthians (1 Cor 16:17–18), has heard oral reports from those in the congregation (1 Cor 1:10–17), and has responded to a letter sent from the Corinthian church (1 Cor 7:1). For more on Paul’s strategy to instruct the Corinthians through all these tools see Margaret M. Mitchell, Paul, the Corinthians and the Birth of Christian Hermeneutics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 1–17.

20

Chapter 1: God and the So-Called Gods

is accustomed to many deities and rulers. The first part of this chapter will give a concise overview of the religious landscape of first century Corinth and then will suggest ways in which this environment influences the reception of the gospel by the Corinthian congregation. Based on evidence in this letter and evidence that can be inferred from their environment, the Corinthians need to be taught how to be faithful to one God. The second part of this chapter will discuss the power of paideia to change one’s perception of the world and will argue that Paul is using paideia to teach the Corinthians how to follow one God and one Lord. Specifically, in 1 Cor 5:6–8 and 10:1–22, Paul is employing an adapted version of exodus traditions for the church’s instruction (10:11). Israel’s exodus narratives had been used for generations to teach a people how to be faithful to God. In light of the “many gods and many lords” of Corinth, Paul’s retelling of the exodus narrative through the lens of the cross is a tool to educate the church and to remind the Corinthians to live as a people who have been washed, sanctified, and justified by God (6:11).

A. “Many Gods and Many Lords” A. “Many Gods and Many Lords”

I. Corinth’s Religious Landscape Judging from the archaeological evidence of first century Corinth, the Corinthians were accustomed to seeing and even honoring multiple gods and rulers in their environment. When the Romans established Corinth as a colony in 44 BCE, they did not demand that the Corinthians stop honoring their own gods to worship Roman deities or even to honor Roman emperors. Instead, Rome added images of Roman power and rule to the already existing pantheon of Greek deities. Evidence shows that Rome deliberately incorporated the Olympian gods into Roman Corinth and respected local Corinthian deities. As a result, even the gods of Greek Corinth appeared to look favorably on Roman rule. The Corinth of Paul’s day was a city rich in religious imagery. If anything can be learned from the archaeological evidence of first century Corinth, it is that the Corinthians were inundated with images of gods and goddesses. Corinth’s religions were not separate from the politics of the city, its social network, or its very cultural life. Based on evidence of the Roman colonization of Corinth, Rome realized the intricate connection between religion, politics, and culture. Although the Roman colonization of this site produced a city that reflected Roman power,2 2

To be sure, Roman Corinth was markedly different from its Greek forerunner. Even the elements of pre-Roman Corinth that were preserved bore the marks of Roman influence. Pausanius is accused of glorifying the Greekness of the Roman colony, and this view

A. “Many Gods and Many Lords”

21

the Romans made use of Greek deities to help sanction their control. The new Roman city was carefully planned. One of the clearest indications of its “Romanness” was the arrangement of the new forum. This newly created forum, built on top of a Greek racetrack, was certainly not a reestablishment of the Greek agora, but instead a new city center indicative of a Roman colony.3 The new civic center contained an impressive display of monuments and temples at the western end of the forum.4 Statues of the Olympian gods were particularly prominent in the new forum.5 Furthermore, there is evidence that Rome restored some temples and preserved others.6 The significance of the presence of such temples will be discussed in the next section. Rome’s preservation and promotion of Greek deities in its reconstruction of the new Roman Corinth indicates that Roman Corinth contained a deliberate mixture of Greek Corinth’s religious past with Rome’s current rule.

dominated archaeological studies until more recent investigations produced a new consensus of its Roman nature. See Mary E. Hoskins Walbank, “Aspects of Corinthian Coinage in the Late First and Early Second Centuries A.D.,” in Corinth, The Centenary 1896–1996, Corinth 20 (The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 2003), 337–349. 3 See M. Walbank, “The Foundation and Planning of Early Roman Corinth,” Journal of Roman Archaeology 10 (1997): 95–130; Nancy Bookidis, “Religion in Corinth: 146 B.C.E. to 100 C.E.,” in Urban Religion in Roman Corinth: Interdisciplinary Approaches (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2005), 141–164; Richard E. DeMaris, “Cults and the Imperial Cult in Early Roman Corinth: Literary Versus Material Record,” in Zwischen den Reichen: Neues Testament und Romishe Herrschaft 9 (Tübingen: Francke Verlag, 2002), 73–91. 4 For a discussion of this center in comparison with literary depictions (or lack thereof) see DeMaris, “Cults and the Imperial Cult in Early Roman Corinth,” 73–91, esp. Figures 1–4 on pp. 85–88. 5 DeMaris has noted a contrast between Greek Corinth with its abundance of hero cults and local deities and the Roman colony’s focus on the Olympian deities. DeMaris, “Cults and the Imperial Cult in Early Roman Corinth,” 82. See also Charles K. Williams, “Corinth and the Cult of Aphrodite,” in Corinthiaca: Studies in Honor of Darrell A. Amyx, ed. Mario A. Del Chiaro (Columbia: University of Missouri, 1986), 12–24. 6 Some of these temples may be associated with the imperial cult. According to Walbank Temple E may have been associated with the temple of the Gens Iulia. Temple F is thought to be identified with Aphrodite, who is also called Venus Gentrix, mother of Aeneas and grandmother of Iulus, and thus ancestress of the Gens Iulia. Temple G may have been associated with the Clarian Apollo, whom Augustus claimed as progenitor. It is difficult to ascertain, however, which deities were honored by some of the temples during Paul’s time. For a discussion of the possible imperial presence early in Roman planning see Walbank, “The Foundation and Planning of Early Roman Corinth,” 95–130. Cf. C. K. Williams, “A Re-evaluation of Temple E and the West End of the Forum of Corinth, “ in The Greek Renaissance in the Roman Empire: Papers from the Tenth British Museum Classical Colloquium, ed. Susan Walker and Averil Cameron (London : University of London, Institute of Classical Studies, 1989), 156–162.

22

Chapter 1: God and the So-Called Gods

Numismatic evidence also indicates that early in Roman Corinth’s history, images of Roman power and Greek myths were seen side by side. For instance, the first coins of Roman Corinth were issued under the power of the duoviri, chief executive city officials who were in charge from the colony’s founding until 69 C.E. One of the earliest coins minted during this period bears the image of Julius Caesar on one side and Bellerophon riding Pegasus on the other.7 Both images are connected to stories of the city’s heritage. Julius Caesar, of course, is given credit posthumously for founding the city as a Roman colony. The story of Bellerophon and Pegasus, however, dates much earlier. This story is found on Corinthian vase paintings as early as the mid-7th century B.C.E, while the earliest preserved narrative account is Pindar’s Thirteenth Olympian Ode of 464 B.C.E.8 The story is also intricately connected to the architecture of the city. The Peirene Fountain, a fountain preserved by the Romans, is the mythical locale where Bellerophon placed a bridle upon Pegasus. Bellerophon was the son of Glaucus and the grandson of Sisyphus, kings of Corinth. When the King of Lycia requested that Bellerophon kill the Chimera, a seer informed him that this feat was only possible if he captured and tamed Pegasus. He found the beast drinking from the spring of Peirene.9 According to legend, Athena helped Bellerophon throw a golden bridle over the horse’s head. As Strabo recounts regarding the fountain, “Here, they say, Pegasus, a winged horse which sprang from the neck of the Gorgon Medusa when her head was cut off, was caught while drinking by Bellerophon. And the same horse, it is said, caused Horse’s Spring to spurt up on Helicon when he struck with his hoof the rock that is below that mountain” (8.6.21b).10 The myth of Pegasus is rooted in the ancient heritage of the city, and the Peirene Fountain is a visible reminder of this tale. Thus, it is not insignificant that one of the earliest coins produced in the new Roman Corinth should bear the image of Pegasus on one side and the image of the city’s new founder on the other. The connection of this ancient myth with the new 7

This coin states that it was minted under “L. Aeficius Certus” and “C. Julius [. . . ],” the earliest duoviri. Thus, the coin may date as early as 43 or 42 B.C.E. See Michel Amandry, Le monnayage des duovirs corinthiens (Athens: École Française D’Athenes, 1988), plates i–ii; Katherine M. Edwards, Coins 1826–1929, Corinth 6 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1933), 16. 8 Betsey A. Robinson, “Fountains and the Formation of Cultural Identity,” in Urban Religion in Roman Corinth, 111–140. 9 There is debate as to the true location of the spring, either the one marked by the fountain or the spring on top of Acrocorinth. Pausanius says about the spring on Acrocorinth, “I have heard it said that this spring and Peirene are the same, the water in the city flowing hence underground” (5.1). Strabo’s account connects the two springs as well, “One could assume that in early time Peirene used to rise over the surface and flow down the sides of the mountain” (8.6.21b). 10 See also Dio Chrysostom, Disc. 36.46.

A. “Many Gods and Many Lords”

23

Roman rule of Corinth demonstrates that the Romans were eager to incorporate stories of Corinth’s Greek heritage into the identity of Roman Corinth. Though some scholars have argued that the images of Greek Corinth were used to propagate the imperial cult,11 evidence for the imperial cult’s acceptance in Corinth is notoriously difficult to date. The cult was established in the eastern empire much earlier than the western regions.12 If looking at a trajectory of evidence for the whole first century, however, it is notable that the progressive honoring of the empire in Corinth did not displace the traditional Corinthian deities. Rather, the Roman rulers continued to make use of these stories to endorse Roman power. Like the coins minted in early Roman Corinth, for instance, coins minted under Domitian, Trajan, and Hadrian, when the imperial cult was more widespread, made extensive use of Corinth’s Greek myths. The real evidence of the progressive onslaught of imperial cult observance is most readily seen in the epigraphic evidence. Of all the Latin inscriptions dedicated to a deity from the founding of Roman Corinth until the time of Hadrian (117–138 C.E.), sixty-three percent are to the imperial cult.13 Based on the numismatic and epigraphic evidence, Colin Miller concludes that, though there is evidence of the imperial cult in Corinth at the time of Paul, it does not enjoy widespread acceptance in the city at this time.14 Rather, it is one cult among many. Based on archaeological evidence from the first centu11 Nancy Bookidis argues for three simultaneous levels of religion in Early Roman Corinth: “The first is that of the official Roman cults of the mother city, which were chiefly gathered in the forum. These drew their inspiration, in large measure, from the house of Augustus and possibly Marc Antony. The second level is that of cults, like those of Apollo, Aphrodite, Asclepius, and Demeter and Kore, that had Greek roots in the city but were by the first century C. E. a part of Roman civic religion. . . . The third level is that of the fringe Greek cults” (“Religion in Corinth: 146 B.C.E. to 100 C.E.,” 163. See also DeMaris, “Cults and the Imperial Cult in Early Roman Corinth,” 82. Susan Alcock describes Roman Greece as “a society in the process of change, adapting and assimilating itself to a new position within an imperial system – just as countless other subordinate societies have been forced to do throughout the centuries.” (Graecia Capta: The Landscapes of Roman Greece [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993], 230). 12 Hans-Josef Klauck, The Religious Context of Early Christianity: A Guide to GraecoRoman Religions (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003), 282–327. See also, surveys in S. R. F. Price, Rituals and Power: The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1996), 23–52; Robert Turcan, The Cults of the Roman Empire (Oxford: Blackwell, 1992), 12–15. 13 20 of 32 inscriptions. Donald Engels, Roman Corinth: An Alternative Model for the Classical City (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1990), 101. See John Harvey Kent, Corinth 8.3: The Inscriptions 1926–1950 (Princeton: American School of Classical Studies, 1966), 19. 14 Colin Miller, “The Imperial Cult in the Pauline Cities of Asia Minor and Greece,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 72 (2010): 314–332, esp. 329–331.

24

Chapter 1: God and the So-Called Gods

ry, the gradual increase of reverence for Roman rulers never displaced the ancient Greek myths.15 What is critical to note for this study is that first century Corinth has a pattern of adopting new rulers and/or new deities into an already existing pantheon. The implications of this brief survey are significant for our study of 1 Corinthians. First, for the (non-Jewish) Roman Corinthians of the first century, there appears to be no need to reject the gods of one’s past in order to honor and respect “new” or current powers. The Roman presence, that eventually became the Roman imperial cult, instead welcomed ancient deities and used those divine images to promote its own rule. Second, Rome’s deliberate employment of Greek myths and stories of local Corinthian heroes reveals that these stories are respected by Rome as images of power and identity. Rome deliberately weds stories of Greek Corinth into this new Roman colony to create a Roman Corinthian identity that recognized both the famed winged Pegasus and the venerable Julius Caesar. Thus, the Gentile Corinthians of Paul’s time have been shaped by an environment that heralds many so-called gods and lords. They walk through the streets of the forum, adorned with temples and statues, and purchase goods with coins bearing the mixed images of both Roman power and Greek divinity. Apart from the synagogue in Corinth, there is no evidence that the Corinthians had a model for being a people who is faithful to only one God.16 Though the account of Acts 18 might lead us to believe that the Corinthians of Paul’s church were former members of the local synagogue, the evidence in Corinthians reveals a different story. II. The Corinthian Church and the Problem of Many Gods and Many Lords In many ways, the plethora of religious imagery in Corinth makes this colony rather typical of a bustling city in the Roman world.17 It might be easy to ignore the rich religious landscape in the backdrop of the Corinthian church’s formation, if not for the issues that Paul raises in 1 Corinthians. Instead, this letter reveals that the rites of this city’s gods and goddesses are encroaching upon the Corinthians’ attempts to live faithfully to one God and one Lord (8:6). To be sure, Paul does not mention other gods or lords by name. This 15

So also Miller, “The Imperial Cult in the Pauline Cities,” 320. Though Acts 18 depicts Paul as first preaching in the synagogue, the archeological evidence for a synagogue in Corinth at the time of Paul is slender. See G. Foerster, “Remains of a Synagogue at Corinth,” in Ancient Synagogues Revealed, ed. Lee I. Levine (Jerusalem: The Israel Exploration Society, 1981), 185; Irina Levinskaya, The Book of Acts in Its Diaspora Setting (Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 1996), 162–166. Furthermore, there are few Jewish names in this letter. Paul treats the majority of the audience as Gentiles who once followed after mute idols (6:9–11; 12:2). 17 See the surveys in Mary Beard, John North and Simon Price, Religions of Rome: Volume I A History (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1998), 167–210, 245–312. 16

A. “Many Gods and Many Lords”

25

honorable mention would be completely unnecessary. The Corinthians encounter imagery of the divine everyday, and, if the classifications of the “weak” and the “knowledgeable” in 8:1–13 are any indication of the Corinthians’ actual discussions regarding the consumption of idol food, this congregation is openly debating how to navigate their religious environment. Even if the issue is not as divisive as Paul depicts it, it appears that the Corinthians themselves have made Paul aware of some areas of contention among them and have asked for Paul’s guidance or support concerning certain issues. The beginning of 8:1 opens with the formula “now concerning” (περὶ δὲ), a formula that echoes Paul’s opening in 7:1 “now concerning the matters of which you wrote.” Paul’s response to their query in 8:1–11:1 reveals the apostle’s perception of the Corinthians’ environment as one that includes many so-called gods. In his assessment, the Corinthians need to be reminded that there is no place for the appearance of honoring these other gods or lords in their current life in Christ (e.g., 1 Cor 10:14). The most explicit reference to Corinth’s religious environment comes in 8:5: “For though there are many so-called gods either in heaven or upon the earth, so there are many gods and many lords.”18 This acknowledgement comes near the beginning of Paul’s extended warning against provoking the Lord’s jealousy by eating idol food at the local temples (8:1–11:1). In this section, Paul not only recognizes the gods of Corinth, but also acknowledges that some of the Corinthians are visiting these temples (8:10). Though many temples were destroyed by the Romans in 146 B.C.E., three temples were rededicated to the same divinities in the Roman period: Demeter and Kore, Asclepius and Hygeia, and Aphrodite on the Acrocorinth.19 Of these three temples, there is evidence that the Asclepion was restored and in use during Paul’s day.20 The Asclepion was not only a place to come for healing,21 but 18

The beginning of Paul’s advice in 8:1–5 has sparked much debate about where Paul might be quoting or paraphrasing the Corinthians’ slogans and where Paul is summarizing the argument to submit his own. Even if 8:5 is somehow attributed to the Corinthians, Paul tacitly acknowledges this claim at the beginning of 8:6 when he states “yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exits, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.” Furthermore, the danger of consuming idol food in the temple precinct is likened to dining with demons in 10:20–21. 19 Engels, Roman Corinth, 95. C. K. Williams believes that Rome preferred to rebuild cultic structures, but renovating a Greek temple was sometimes more expedient, as must have been the case with the Asclepion (C.K. Williams, “The Refounding of Corinth: Some Roman Religious Attitudes,” in Roman Architecture in the Greek World, ed. Sarah Macready and F. H. Thompson (London: Alard and Son, 1987], 26–37). 20 Though other temples had banquet halls, John Fotopoulos has argued that the Asclepion had banquet halls in use during Paul’s time and would, therefore, be the most likely venue for the backdrop of 1 Cor 8:1–13. See J. Fotopoulos, Food Offered to Idols in Ro-

26

Chapter 1: God and the So-Called Gods

its banquet halls were used to host a number of social events—anniversaries, private dinner parties, celebrations, etc. Though Chapter Three will expound on the implications of these gatherings for the Corinthian church, for now it is necessary to note that some of the Corinthians were dining in temples like the Asclepion (1 Cor 8:10). Furthermore, Paul depicts the Corinthian believers as living in an environment with real temptations to go back to a life of idolatry (8:10; 10:14). In the banquet halls of the local temple, all celebrants would be required to honor the god or goddess of the temple through religious rites and to consume food and drink that had first been dedicated to an idol.22 Those who attended these functions regularly would no doubt have been accustomed to the rites and may not have considered these formalities as particularly indicative of their own religious devotion. Indeed, as will be discussed later, the “knowledgeable” in Corinth do not have any qualms about these gatherings (8:1–13), even though all gatherings in the temple precinct had religious significance. Unfortunately, their compliance has served as a stumbling block for others in the congregation, “the weak,” who might be encouraged to honor other gods alongside the one God and one Lord (8:10–12). Though the religious backdrop of the city is front and center in the dilemma of eating idol meat (8:1–11:1), it is by no means confined to this issue. Underlying the rhetoric of the first four chapters of 1 Corinthians is the conviction that the God who works through the cross is a God who works in ways that are counter to what Corinthian culture would expect of a deity. Kavin Rowe argues that the early church’s message would have demanded a complete change of worldview due to the exclusivity of the God of Israel: Converting to the God of the Christians was not merely an adjustment of this or that aspect of an otherwise unaltered basic cultural pattern; rather, worshipping the God of the Christians simultaneously involved (1) an extraction or removal from constitutive aspects of pagan culture (e.g., sacrifice to the gods), and (2) a concomitant cultural profile that rendered Christians identifiable as a group by outsiders. Yet the practices that created this cultural profile were themselves dependent upon the identity of God. Christian ecclesial life, in other words, was the cultural explication of God’s identity.23

This God acts in unexpected ways. Paul wastes no time to link the scandalous cross of Christ with the very power and wisdom of God (1:18–2:5). This foolishness of the cross shames those in the world who consider themselves man Corinth: A Social-Rhetorical Reconsideration of 1 Corinthians 8:1–11:1 (Tübingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 2003), 63–70. See also, discussion in Chapter Three. 21 Fotopoulos, Food Offered to Idols, 63–70. 22 See Wendell Lee Willis, Idol Meat in Corinth: The Pauline Argument in 1 Corinthians 8 and 10 (Chico: Scholars Press, 1981), 7–64. 23 C. Kavin Rowe, World Upside Down: Reading Acts in the Graeco-Roman Age (Oxford: Oxford University, 2009), 18.

B. The Power of Paideia

27

strong or powerful (1:26–27). In 2:6–7 Paul acknowledges “rulers of this age” who have crucified the Lord of glory. They operate by the “wisdom of this age” and are therefore part of those who are perishing (2:6). Paul does not bother to single out any earthly ruler, but simply lumps all “rulers”— whether earthly leaders or cosmic forces (such as Death, 1 Cor 15:1–58)24— into an age that is passing away (7:31). Countering the many gods and lords are repeated reminders of the God who called the Corinthians. In the introduction and thanksgiving alone, which comprise the first nine verses of the letter, Paul mentions God six times (1:1, 2, 3, 4, 9) and some version of the Lord Jesus Christ nine times (1:1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9). In 1:30, the apostle attempts to squelch the believers’ boasting by arguing that Christ is the source of their very existence. The Corinthians belong to Christ and, therefore, to God (3:23). The believers have been baptized into the name of one body, the body of Christ (12:12–13) and have been bought with a price (6:20). In both 3:16–17 and 6:19, Paul claims that the Corinthians are the very temple of God, and the Spirit of God has given each of them gifts to edify the body (12:4–31; 14:1–33). In the midst of Paul’s acknowledgement of other gods and lords, Paul reminds the Corinthians that those who love God have been known by God (8:3). This is the God whom the Corinthians are called to glorify (6:20; 10:32). As this brief survey reveals, the religious landscape of Corinth provides a challenge for a fledgling community that, from Paul’s perspective, is struggling to reconcile their newfound faith with their daily lives. In this letter, the constant reminders of who the Corinthians are in Christ runs counter to the images that vie for their loyalty in their environment. Though this struggle is, perhaps, most clearly visible in the dilemma of idol food consumption, the rest of the letter also bears witness to the gospel in which the Corinthians first believed (15:2) and of the God who has given them life in Christ (1:30). In sum, this letter attempts to accomplish more than responding to the Corinthians’ dilemmas and divisiveness. It is an attempt to inform the church of what it means to be the church of God.

B. The Power of Paideia B. The Power of Paideia

The above survey of evidence in the letter of 1 Corinthians demonstrates that the Corinthians’ religious environment is a stumbling block to some in the congregation. The religious landscape offers many reminders of the Corinthians’ former lives when they were “led astray by mute idols” (12:2). Paul 24

Regarding views of death as a power, see Martinus C. de Boer, The Defeat of Death: Apocalyptic Eschatology in 1 Corinthians 15 and Romans 5, JSNTSup 22 (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1988).

28

Chapter 1: God and the So-Called Gods

is countering more than Corinth’s religious imagery, however. With Corinth’s rich religious heritage come differing perspectives of how the divine works in the world (consider the rhetoric of 1:18–2:16). The images of the gods, goddesses, rulers and heroes that line the streets of Corinth tell a markedly different story than the word of the cross. These images are central to Corinth’s cultural paideia, and this paideia has informed the Corinthians’ perception of the divine, sense of identity, and understanding of virtue. The religious imagery of Corinth – whether of the divine or of local heroes – represents stories that educated a people about who they are, where they come from, and how they should behave. The images of the divine and the stories associated with them are all part and parcel of the culture that informs the values of a people. According to Tim Whitmarsh, paideia is not just a form of social practice that educates a people, but a “means of constructing and reifying idealized identities . . . a foundation upon which . . . peoples constructed their own sense of their place in the world.”25 Paideia shaped a people’s identity and produced a sense of how “life should be lived.”26 Central to paideia was attention to the past. Whitmarsh argues, “Across the multiplicity of forms and modes of Roman Greek education, one feature remained common: the attempt to root all forms of status and identity in the prestigious past.”27 Stories of the past provide levels of paideia. For instance, those who had not studied the grammar of the classical period could still learn about the gods’ exploits with humanity and the virtues extolled through the legends of heroes. Those who were not capable of reading these stories would still hear them and would see their imagery in the world all around them. In other words, stories of the past educate even those who have not had the privilege of an official education. Religious imagery not only reveals the importance of the past to the formation of a culture, but the myths of gods and heroes can also exalt character traits and virtues that are lauded by a people. An example of the power of myths is evident in the popularity of Homeric literature. Marrou claims that in Homer moral philosophers found a type of catechism for teaching a perception of the divine, a summary of humanity’s duties to the gods, and a handbook of practical morality.28 According to Plato, the poet “clothes all the great deeds accomplished by the men of old with glory, and thus educates those who come after” (italics added, Phaedrus 245a). Furthermore, the Homeric literature itself suggests using stories of the heroes of the past to in25

Tim Whitmarsh, Greek Literature and the Roman Empire: The Politics of Imitation (London: Oxford University Press, 2001), 16. 26 Whitmarsh, Greek Literature and the Roman Empire, 5. 27 Whitmarsh, Greek Literature and the Roman Empire, 6. 28 H. I. Marrou, A History of Education in Antiquity, trans. George Lamb (London: Sheed and Ward, 1956).

B. The Power of Paideia

29

struct conduct in the present. For example, when Phoenix urges Achilles to set aside his fury for King Agamemnon and to fight against the Trojans, Phoenix appeals to deeds of other heroes who were overcome by fury and pleads with Achilles: “So we’ve heard the famous deeds of fighting men, of heroes, when seething anger would overcome the great ones (639–41). . . Don’t let your spirit turn you down that path, dear boy (731)” (Iliad 9.524– 737).29 The preservation of stories had the power to shape which actions were viewed as honorable and which should be avoided altogether. Paideia, through stories of the divine and of heroes, not only provided a sense of virtue, but it also served as an identity marker. The knowledge of stories automatically forms a boundary. If the stories of certain heroes are passed from generation to generation, then those stories become part of the culture preserving them. People who are not part of that culture may not be familiar with its stories. In fact, varying levels of familiarity or lack of familiarity can be a sign of one’s status as an outsider. Learning the traditions, however, grants one the opportunity to assume a new identity within a foreign culture. The opportunity to learn the stories that shape a culture’s values and ideals means that paideia can become a key form of “self-creating.”30 Lucian provides an excellent example of a “barbarian” who used paideia to “become” Greek. In the brief writing On the Dream, or Lucian’s Life, Lucian of Samosata records his transformation through the story of a dream in which two different life paths were presented through the personified forms of Sculpture and Paideia. Sculpture represents the life that Lucian could enjoy if he stays in his homeland and follows in the footsteps of his grandfather and uncles who were sculptors. She promises him fame, but her own barbarisms (barbarizousa, Somn. 8) indicate that this path will be revered only in his homeland and will not afford him the ability to go abroad (Somn. 7). Paideia, however, mocks the temptation to follow Sculpture and to “make yourself less valuable than stone” (Somn. 13). Instead, she offers him a good reputation, honor, and status: And you, who at present are the impoverished son of a nobody and have been giving thought to so ignoble a craft, will before long be admired and envied by all, honored, praised and esteemed for what’s best, the focus of attention from men of outstanding birth or wealth, wearing clothes as fine as these’ – here she showed me the clothes she wore which were quite magnificent – ‘and given posts of authority and the best seats everywhere. And if you travel from home, you’ll be recognized and acclaimed even on foreign

29

Homer, The Iliad, trans. Robert Fagles (London: Penguin Classics, 1998). I owe the term “self-creating” to Tim Whitmarsh who argues that paideia is the primary form of self-creating (Greek Literature and the Roman Empire, 123). 30

30

Chapter 1: God and the So-Called Gods

soil; for I’ll give you such marks of distinction that everyone who sees you will nudge his neighbour, point to you and say, “Look, there’s the great man.”31 Somn. 11

Paideia offered him all the appearance of high status. He would be considered worthy of office, even if in reality he was less than worthy. The allure of splendid clothing suggests concealment and deceit.32 Thus, paideia offers Lucian a chance to appear to be someone whom he is not. Paideia offers a way to transcend cultural boundaries by fostering an identity transformation.33 Lucian is no longer confined to his homeland, but now can freely move about all the major cities and be considered as someone worthy of status. The change of identity, however, is not complete. Lucian, a barbarian, would undergo some transformation, but he would also always maintain some connection with his “barbarian” heritage. Lucian is “both fully saturated in Hellenic paideia and an outsider.”34 According to Whitmarsh, he still sees the world with a type of bifocal vision: one perspective shaped and nurtured by his past (which he never truly escapes) and one crafted by paideia.35 Although education offers a way to transcend the culture of one’s parents, it also fosters an identity crisis. “In every case, becoming educated is a process of rebirth, the creation of a new self; but in certain cases, it allows for a more radical reorientation, a quite literal (but always symbolically freighted) change of culture.”36 Lucian’s story represents what paideia can do to change one’s present status and identity. Paideia is powerful. Learning the sacred stories of a people and adopting them as one’s own provided the ability to be shaped by another culture’s sense of identity and virtue. Paideia provided an arena whereby one’s own cultural heritage could be challenged or replaced to adopt another’s stories. The city of Corinth was full of religious imagery. Every image carried with it stories of power – either that of the divine or that of Roman rule. None of these images, however, taught the Corinthians how to honor only one God. This is the task set before Paul. The apostle uses paideia to instruct the Corinthians how to live faithfully to God and to bear witness to their new identity in Christ (1:30; 3:23; 6:11). To be clear, God is the one who called the Corinthians and thus granted them a new identity as God’s church. Paul instructs them how to live into this calling. It is evident from the beginning of the letter that Paul expects the Corinthians to be shaped by the scandalous message of the cross (1:18–2:5). Furthermore, based on Paul’s use of scrip31

M.D. Macleod, trans. Lucian: A Selection (Warminster: Aris & Phillips, 1991), 29. Whitmarsh, Greek Literature and the Roman Empire, 123. 33 Whitmarsh, Greek Literature and the Roman Empire, 124. 34 Whitmarsh, Greek Literature and the Roman Empire, 124–25. 35 Whitmarsh, Greek Literature and the Roman Empire, 124. 36 Whitmarsh, Greek Literature and the Roman Empire, 129. 32

C. One God and One Lord

31

ture in 1 Cor 5:6–8 and 10:1–22, Paul finds in his christocentric reading of Israel’s exodus a tool to teach the Corinthians the need to live faithfully to one God and one Lord (10:6, 11).

C. One God and One Lord: Pauline Paideia with Exodus Traditions C. One God and One Lord

Onto Corinth’s rich religious landscape, Paul paints a portrait of another God – a God, whose wisdom, Paul claims, has been revealed through a crucified, Jewish Messiah. From the beginning of the letter, Paul establishes that this God is different than the gods of Corinth. To do so he heavily relies upon the word of the cross as a paradigm of the believers’ behavior toward one another (1:18–2:5). The word of the cross runs counter to the world of the Corinthians in every way. This God’s wisdom looks like “foolishness.” The God who called the Corinthians is simply not like the Greco-Roman gods and goddesses that pepper Corinth’s landscape. The God of Israel is a jealous Lord. Paul seeks to instruct the believers what it means to be the church of God in Corinth. In Israel’s exodus tradition, the apostle finds a telling example for his fledgling church. This section will explore the power of Israel’s exodus story and the role of this tradition to educate generation after generation how to be the people of God. I. The Power of the Exodus Tradition as Paideia The exodus story was a tradition used to teach generation after generation about the identity of a people by reciting a narrative of their God. Alan Kirk refers to ancestral traditions like the exodus as “master commemorative narratives.”37 These narratives do more than preserve the past but help shape perceptions of the present: The past, itself constellated by the work of social memory, provides the framework for cognition, organization, and interpretation of the experiences of the present. . . . Master commemorative narratives that have achieved secure status in the cultural memory are not inert, museum-piece representations of the past; rather, they vitally shape perception and organization of reality. They are cognitive schemata, ‘nuclear scripts’ for interpreting and processing streams of experience.38

37

Alan Kirk, “Social and Cultural Memory,” in Memory, Tradition, and Text: Uses of the Past in Early Christianity, ed. A. Kirk and T. Thatcher (Atlanta: SBL, 2005), 15. 38 Kirk, Memory, Tradition and Text, 15. In a discussion on a group’s ideology and how traditions, symbols, and conventions shape meaning, Ricoeur says, “A founding act can be revived and reactualised only in an interpretation which models it retroactively, through a representation of itself” (225). Thus, the social group provides for itself and for outsiders

32

Chapter 1: God and the So-Called Gods

Israel’s exodus was certainly not an “inert, museum-piece representation” of Israel’s past, but a tradition ever changing to speak to the circumstances of those who held it dear. In this study, tradition will be defined as “those events, stories, rituals and symbols that shape the collective identity of a community, that are passed down in a community from generation to generation and that are rooted in the foundational past of that community.”39 Tradition, though rooted in the past, is part of group identity that is ever-evolving in response to its environment. There is tension between the remote past and the transformation of the tradition for the present.40 Tradition that is passed on unchanged is dysfunctional and has no living power.41 According to George Allan, A living tradition transmits the past by sustaining the original presence of former accomplishments despite the perishing of the details that embody it. The correct embodiment does not preserve the past; it recreates it. So over time the power of the beginning grows instead of dwindling. I am not confronted with fainter and fainter copies of some original but rather with its ever more complexly articulated reality.42

For a tradition to survive, the past must be recreated for its new cultural, social, and historical context so that the community shapes a new tradition from the old. This newly fashioned tradition then becomes the tradition passed onto future generations.43 The exodus tradition has been preserved in various forms throughout Israel’s scripture and through Israel’s festival of Passover in order to teach new generations who are facing different obstacles than their ancestors.44 and image of itself through reenacting tradition (225, 243). Paul Ricoeur Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences: Essays on Language, Action and Interpretation, ed. J. B. Thompson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981), 222–246. 39 Keesmaat, 17; cf. Shils’ less narrow definition of tradition as “anything which is transmitted or handed down from the past to the present” (Edward Shils, Tradition [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981], 12). 40 Shils, 13–16. 41 Keesmaat, 19; cf. Geertz, 89–90. 42 George Allan, The Importances of the Past: A Meditation on the Authority of Tradition (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1986), 237 (italics mine). Related to the preservation of tradition is the role of memory. See Werner H. Kelber, “The Works of Memory: Christian Origins as MnemoHistory A Response,” in Memory, Tradition, and Text, 221–248. 43 Keesmaat, 21. 44 The exodus tradition is told again and again throughout Israel’s Scriptures and Hellenistic Jewish literature. E.g., the exodus tradition underlies Deut 7:12–26; 8:1–8; 9:26– 29; 11:1–9; 32:8–9, 21; Josh 3:5–17; 4:18–24; 5:10–11; 24; Judg 2:11; 1 Sam 12:6; Jer 32:16; Dan 9:4; Ps 105; 114:3; Isa 19:16–25; Amos 9:7. E.g. of the exodus narrative as a source of hope, see Isa 11:11–16; Hos 2:16–17; Micah 7:14–15; Isa 11:11–16; Ps 78; Jer 16:14–15; 23:7–8. The exodus was also often recast in response to Israel’s social crises, Ezek 30:36–37; Isa 43:16–21; 51:9–11. Regarding the appeal to the exodus in Hellenistic

C. One God and One Lord

33

The repetition of the exodus throughout scripture is indicative of what Fishbane calls a reflective historiography, that is, history repeating its deepest and most indelible cultural memory.45 The exodus traditions shape the collective memory of Israel, since these traditions were passed on within family households and in the cultic rites of the people.46 Because the exodus served a central role in the formation of the Israelite community, this tradition affected how later events were interpreted. An excellent example of the influence of the exodus story for interpreting later events can be seen in the conquest narratives of Joshua. In Josh 5:10–11, the entrance into the land adopts exodus-like imagery as the Israelites cross the Jordan and then eat of the paschal meal (Josh 5:10–11).47 Upon partaking this first paschal meal in the promised land, the Israelites no longer ate manna, but lived off the fruit of the land that God had provided. In this context, the paschal meal, situated at the arrival into the land but before the conquest of Jericho, recalls the exodus by remembering God’s power of deliverance and trusting in God’s word.

Jewish literature see Philo, Sacr. 63; Migr. 25; Spec. 2.145–57; QE 1.4; Leg 3:94; Josephus, A.J. 2.311; 3.248, 291; 5.20, 22; 9.268; 10.68; 11.109; 14.19, 25; 17.213; 18.29, 90; 20.105; B.J. 2.8, 39; 6.420. Artapanus, whose work is preserved in fragments in the writings of Eusebius and Clement, uses the exodus tradition as a foundation for his embellishments on the central role of Moses in bringing culture to the ancient world (Eusebius, Praeparatio Evangelica 9.18, 23, 27; Clement, Strom. 1.23-26). Cf. the polemical writings of Manetho (3rd century BC), Hecataeus of Abdera (c. 300 BC), Lysimachus (1st or 2nd century BC), Chaeremon, and Apion (AD 1st century) who attack Israel’s exodus tradition. For a discussion on the importance of the exodus as a story of Israel’s origins, see John J. Collins, “Reinventing Exodus: Exegesis and Legend in Hellenistic Egypt,” For a Later Generation: The Transformation of Tradition in Israel, Early Judaism, and Early Christianity, ed. R. A. Argall, B. A. Bow, and R. A. Werline (Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 2000), 52–62. See also Fishbane, Text and Texture, 121. 45 Fishbane, Text and Texture, 122. 46 The collective memory comprises those stories or events that are passed along that help shape the identity of a people. All collective memory studies are indebted to Maurice Halbwachs, On Collective Memory, ed. and trans. L. A. Coser (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992). For the use of collective memory studies in the study of Israel, see Jan Assmann, “Guilt and Remembrance: On the Theologization of History in the Ancient Near East,” History and Memory 2 (1990): 5–33; idem, Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997); Gerdien Jonker, The Topography of Remembrance: The Dead, Tradition and Collective Memory in Mesopotamia (Leiden: Brill, 1995); Joseph Blenkinsopp, “Memory, Tradition and the Construction of the Past in Ancient Israel,” BTB 27 (1997): 76–82; Marc Zvi Brettler, “Memory in Ancient Israel” in Memory and History in Christianity and Judaism, ed. M. Signer (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2001): 1–17; Ronald S. Hendel, “The Exodus in Biblical Memory,” JBL 120 (2001): 601–22; and Mark S. Smith, “Remembering God: Collective Memory in Israelite Religion,” CBQ 64 (2002): 631–651. 47 See Fishbane, Text and Texture, 122.

34

Chapter 1: God and the So-Called Gods

In its many rehearsals, the exodus was often recast in response to Israel’s social crises to recall God’s redemption of the people and God’s covenant to be Israel’s God. During the Babylonian exile, the prophet Ezekiel appeals to the wilderness wanderings as a time of the Lord’s judgment and a purification of the people: “As I entered into judgment with your ancestors in the wilderness of the land of Egypt, so I will enter into judgment with you, says the Lord God. I will make you pass under the staff, and will bring you within the bond of the covenant” (20:36–37). In this situation, the reminder of the ancestors’ exodus prompts a rehearsal of the people’s covenant relationship with an all-powerful God and warns that infidelity will be punished. Ezekiel’s exodus allusions highlight the might of the Lord to bring forth his people from the nations and demonstrate that the divine action of deliverance for this people serves to identify who the Lord is: “You shall know that I am the Lord, when I bring you into the land of Israel, the country that I swore to give to your ancestors” (Ezek 20:42). Israel’s existence is due to the actions of this God, and their identity rests in preserving the distinctiveness of the Lord among the gods of the nations. In Isaiah, for instance, exodus traditions remind the people of God’s mighty deeds and the implications of being God’s people. In Isa 11:11–16, the hope for the remnant of God’s people to return to the land is depicted as a second exodus.48 Through exodus imagery, Deutero-Isaiah also expresses hope of the assurance of God’s salvation because of the Lord’s power and faithfulness in the past. In Isa 43:16–21, the Lord, who makes a way in the sea and a path through the mighty waters, provides drink in the wilderness for his people, “the people whom I formed for myself so that they might declare my praise” (Isa 43:21). These words come after a reminder of God’s identity as “your Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel” (43:14), “the Creator of Israel, your King” (43:15). The Lord reminds his people, “I, I am the Lord, and besides me there is no savior. I declared and saved and proclaimed, when there was no strange god among you; and you are my witnesses, says the Lord. I am God, and also henceforth I am He; there is no one who can deliver from my hand; I work and who can hinder it?” (Isa 43:11–13). DeuteroIsaiah emphasizes the reality that Israel exists because God created this people, called them by name, and redeemed them (41:14; 43:1; 44:2, 21, 24; 48:17; 49:7), and the writer appeals to God’s great work in Israel’s exodus to bring hope of their future restoration (see also 48:21; 51:10). Even in the rehearsals of the exodus in Israel’s scripture, God’s activity is not confined to Israel. The exodus also provides a lens for viewing the nations. As Patrick Miller observes,

48

Fishbane, 127.

C. One God and One Lord

35

What God has done is historical, in the sense that the covenantal community is not a Platonic ideal but one that has been created in human history in the experience of a particular people, and it is paradigmatic as well, in the sense that the way of God’s acting with this particular people is indicative of God’s way in the world.49

One piece of the exodus tradition that is highlighted by some Jewish authors is Israel’s role in being a light to the nations (Isa 42:6; 49:6; 60:1–3). Based on this role, there is hope of God’s deliverance even for Israel’s enemies.50 The prophet Isaiah transforms the exodus motif in 19:19–25 so that the former oppressors of Israel, the Egyptians, have future hope of the Lord’s deliverance in an exodus-type event, when the Lord will make himself known to Israel’s enemies and call them his people: “On that day Israel will be the third with Egypt and Assyria, a blessing in the midst of the earth, whom the Lord of hosts has blessed, saying, ‘Blessed be Egypt my people, and Assyria the work of my hands, and Israel my heritage’” (Isa 19:24–25). Similarly, Amos 9:7 credits the Lord for delivering other nations: “Are you not like the Ethiopians to me, O people of Israel? says the Lord. Did I not bring Israel up from the land of Egypt, and the Philistines from Caphtor and the Arameans from Kir?” Isaiah 19 and Amos 9 attest to the prominence of the exodus as a story of God’s actions in the world and illustrate the early use of the exodus narrative to depict the Lord’s redeeming activity beyond the boundaries of one people. Although the exodus is rehearsed again and again in Israel’s scripture to speak to diverse situations, appeals to the exodus tradition were not confined to Israel’s sacred texts.51 Authors like Artapanus, Josephus, and Philo represent Jewish attempts to appeal to the exodus tradition in a battle over Israel’s origins that would have had extensive repercussions for status in their present situation in the Hellenistic age.52 Artapanus, whose work is preserved in fragments in the writings of Eusebius and Clement, uses the exodus tradition as a foundation for his embellishments on the central role of Moses in bringing culture to the ancient world.53 This embellished account of Jewish origins stands in contrast to the polemical writings of Manetho, Lysimachus, Chaeremon, and Apion, who all express knowledge of the exodus event, but who

49

Patrick Miller, Deuteronomy (Louisville: John Knox, 1990), 203. For the complexities of perspectives regarding Israel’s relationship with non-Jewish neighbors see the broad survey of texts in Terence Donaldson, Judaism and the Gentiles: Jewish Patterns of Universalism (to 135 CE) (Waco: Baylor University, 2007). 51 Israel’s scripture also suggests that other nations were aware of Israel’s exodus story, e.g., 1 Sam 4:8. 52 See Collins, “Reinventing Exodus,” 56. 53 Eusebius, Praep. ev. 9.18, 23, 27; Clement, Strom. 1.23-26, 29. Collins argues that Artapanus must have written no later than the early first century B.C.E. (“Reinventing Exodus,” 53). 50

36

Chapter 1: God and the So-Called Gods

attack the Jewish account and attempt to undermine its claims.54 The fact that the exodus tradition is known by those who wish to discredit Israel’s story suggests that this myth of origin was the one widely associated with the Jewish people in the Hellenistic age.55 The appeals to the exodus traditions on multiple fronts – whether by the Jewish people for instruction or by polemical writers in their attacks – reveals the power that this tradition held as an identity marker of the Jewish people and particularly, their God. As the reflective appeals to the exodus tradition throughout Israel’s scriptures exhibit, ancestral stories instruct future generations by dramatizing past events in order to frame the present and to provide hope for the future.56 In each of these exodus rehearsals, the story that explains Israel’s origins is used to interpret the current social situation and to instruct Israel to be faithful to God – by bringing hope, by reminding the people of the need for holiness, or by recalling the incomprehensible nature of the Lord’s deeds. The motif of Israel’s deliverance from Egypt highlighted God’s saving acts on behalf of his people and his faithful guidance to the promised land. Although the people were not always faithful in response to the Lord’s deliverance, the exodus serves as both a reminder of the Lord’s faithfulness and an injunction to faithfulness on the part of the people. II. Passover and Paideia According to Exod 12:26–27, the Passover is a time to rehearse the exodus tradition in order to teach the next generation about the deeds of the Lord. Given the strict rules for paschal observance found in Israel’s scriptures, it is rather surprising that future generations of Jews freely adapted and reinterpreted paschal traditions to instruct future generations. Though we cannot know with certainty how Jews in the first century world, particularly across the Diaspora, adapted paschal observance to meet their needs,57 we do have evidence of earlier adaptations in response to social changes in Jewish life. For instance, after the destruction of the temple, adjustments had to be made

54

Dates for these authors: Manetho third century BCE, Lysimachus first or second century BCE, Chaeremon and Apion first century CE. See discussion in Keesmaat, 43–44. 55 Widespread association of the exodus tradition with the Jews does not mean, however, that there was widespread familiarity with the paschal traditions. While the formerly Gentile Corinthians may have associated an exodus story with the Jewish people, we can not be certain that they had any particular knowledge of the Jewish festival that commemorated Israel’s exodus. 56 Fishbane, 135. Cf. Clifford Geertz, Interpretation of Cultures (New York: Basic Books, 1973), 46, 49, 140 with reference to organizing “symbols.” 57 Regarding what the Corinthians may have known about the Passover, see the discussion in Chapter Four and in the Introduction.

C. One God and One Lord

37

regarding the paschal sacrifice.58 No longer could it occur in Jerusalem as Deuteronomy mandates (Deut 16:1–8). Though texts like Exodus 12 and Deuteronomy 16 represent an ideal paschal observance, evidence suggests that these texts were interpreted in a variety of ways. Philo perhaps displays the most freedom in adapting sacred tradition to meet the needs of his Hellenized audience. Although he is often expounding texts (e.g. Migr. 25) or explaining some element of the scriptural tradition (e.g. Leg. 3.94), Philo mystically transforms the ritual of the physical Passover into a Passover of the mind as it crosses over from a realm of passions into a realm of reason.59 In QE 1.4, Philo claims that the deeper meaning of the Passover is the transformation of the mind from attributes like ignorance, intemperance, fear, avarice and injustice to the virtues of wisdom, education (paideia), patience, moderation, courage, confidence, justice and equality. Although he freely interprets the Passover as the metaphorical passage of the soul from vice to virtue, within the same context Philo affirms that the paschal feast honors the Lord (Sacr. 63). In Spec. 2.145–49, he links the institution of the Passover with remembrance and gratitude for the exodus.60 In comparison with Philo, Josephus is less creative in his appeals to the Passover.61 In A.J. 17.213, he affirms the Passover as a memorial of deliverance out of Egypt, but in A.J. 11.109, he portrays it as a time of memorial for God’s guidance into the land, for the giving of the law, and for the King of Persia’s favor toward the people. Thus, in this latter reference, a key component of the continuation of the tradition in Exod 12:26–27 – the remembrance of God’s deliverance – is not central, and he adds elements – namely, the references to the law and to the King of Persia – that were not typically recalled by other paschal rehearsals. In sum, while both Philo and Josephus dialogue with the exodus tradition received from Israel’s Scriptures,62 they each freely interact with that tradition and reconfigure it to meet their interests. Although the Passover tradition was adapted to fit social needs, the paschal commemoration was a reminder that Israel’s continued existence as a people is due to the work of an almighty God. Throughout Israel’s scriptures, appeals to the exodus story recall God’s power and urge the people to be holy. Generation after generation remembered God’s deeds and sacrificed a pure 58

See Baruch Bokser, The Origins of the Seder: The Passover Rite and Early Rabbinic Judaism (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984), esp. 92. 59 Philo, Leg. 3.154, 165; Sacr. 63; Migr. 25; Spec. 2.145–57; QE 1.4; Her. 192, 255; Congr. 106. 60 See also Philo, QE 1.4. 61 Josephus, A.J. 2.311; 3.248, 291; 5.20, 22; 9.268; 10.68; 11.109; 14.19, 25; 17.213; 18.29, 90; 20.105; B.J. 2.8, 39; 6.420. 62 E.g., Philo, Migr. 25; Leg. 3.94, Spec. 2.145–48; Josephus, B.J. 6.420, A.J. 5.48; 11.109.

38

Chapter 1: God and the So-Called Gods

lamb to the Lord. Anyone who failed to observe this offering was to be ostracized from the people: “But anyone who is clean and is not on a journey, and yet refrains from keeping the Passover, shall be cut off from the people for not presenting the Lord’s offering at its appointed time; such a one shall bear the consequences for the sin” (Num 9:13). This narrative of God’s choosing and delivering of one people serves as a testimony of his power to all nations and to his faithfulness to an often unfaithful people. The Passover, however it was celebrated or adapted by future generations, was a time to remember that “I am the Lord” (Exod 12:12). III. Concluding Reflections on the Power of Exodus Traditions The exodus narrative is a story that grants a heritage, a sense of calling, and a revelation of the divine. For the Jewish people, the exodus served as a living tradition told and retold for each generation. The remembrance of the exodus served as a vivid reminder of the power of the God who claimed the Israelites, delivered them, and fashioned them into a people. The annual repetition of this story to future generations through paschal traditions instilled a sense of identity by conferring a place of belonging among this people with whom God had established a covenant. Furthermore, the exodus stories provided instruction for how Israelites were to view God, their place in the world, and their responsibilities to live as God’s people. First and foremost, Israel’s exodus is a story about God. The narrative recorded in Exod 1–15 portrays this event as the consummate expression of the Lord’s power and as the foundational story of national redemption.63 Without the mighty acts of God, there would be no exodus story to tell. The stories of Israel’s exodus make manifest a God who takes an active role in rescuing his people (e.g., Exod 3:7–22; 6:2–9). This God, who is finally revealed by name, is also the faithful God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and has heard the cries of their descendants (3:3–7; 6:2). In Deuteronomy, for instance, the exodus event is portrayed as the fulfillment of God’s promises to the patriarchs (Deut 32:7–14). In Deut 29:2–9, the Moabite covenant recalls God’s activity in the past – to deliver the people from Egypt, to guide them through the wilderness, and to defeat Sihon and Og – to prompt the Israelites to choose life in the land that God has promised (30:15–20). Patrick Miller argues that God only requires Israel to enter a covenant relationship because God has first demonstrated loving-kindness to this people: “All the talk of demand and obedience, of sanctions and blessing and curse, does not come into the conversation until the people have been grasped and held by the powerful and loving hand of God.”64 It is God’s activity that has 63 64

Fishbane, 121. Miller, Deuteronomy, 202.

C. One God and One Lord

39

formed this people, God’s loving-kindness that has prompted a relationship with them, and God’s power that has sustained them. The exodus story not only reveals God, but also fosters community. Simply reciting the story as a reminder of their origins bonds the Israelites to all the generations that have come before them and joins them in fellowship with one another. Recalling the story is an act of community formation. The exodus tradition, commemorated year after year, articulates a particular understanding of one’s place in the world and provides a framework for how to live in the present. Since this story exemplified God’s power of deliverance and his faithfulness to keep his promises, this narrative also became an interpretive lens to hope for God’s activity in the future.65 With each retelling of the exodus, generation after generation recalls God’s wondrous acts and trusts in God’s faithfulness to his people. The promise of the exodus is that God will make new futures possible, and each generation can find hope in this promise.66 The story of Israel’s exodus forms a particular kind of community, however, a community who lives in covenant relationship with the God who delivered them (e.g., Exod 15:26; 16:4; 19:5–8; 20:1–21). In many ways the exodus story being retold to each generation teaches the people what it means to be the Lord’s and reminds the people of the faithful God who chose them. It is a paradigmatic story in the sense that it shapes each generation’s perception of God’s acts of salvation and demands response from all who would claim to be God’s people.67 Israel is called to be faithful to God as God has been faithful Israel. In the exodus, therefore, there is a wedding of theology, community, and praxis. The God who delivered the Israelites and formed them into a nation, calls them to act in accordance to their new identity as God’s people. For this story to speak to the needs of each generation, however, it is a story that is adapted in light of various contexts to teach the Israelites what it means to be the people of God. IV. Pauline Paideia, Israel’s Exodus, and 1 Corinthians In 1 Cor 10:11, in the midst of Paul’s allusion to Israel’s exodus, Paul claims that this story was written down “for our instruction, upon whom the end of the ages has come.” Paul is employing Israel’s exodus story to teach the 65 According to Michael Fishbane, the exodus tradition became a paradigm of historical renewal with each Israelite generation recounting the exodus as an archetypal expression of its own future hope (Text and Texture: Close Readings of Selected Biblical Texts [New York: Schocken Books, 1979], 121). 66 Bruce Birch, Walter Brueggemann, Terence E. Fretheim and David L. Petersen, A Theological Introduction to the Old Testament (Nashville: Abingdon, 1999), 124. 67 Birch, et al., A Theological Introduction, 120.

40

Chapter 1: God and the So-Called Gods

Corinthians what it means to be the church of God. Like generations of Jews, Paul finds in this tradition a powerful tool for instruction. Furthermore, as the following chapters will demonstrate, Paul freely adapted this tradition in light of his current situation, as did many writers before him. The exodus has both shaped Paul’s understanding of what it means to be faithful to a jealous God and has shaped Paul’s instruction to the church at Corinth to live as a faithful community of saints. In sum, Paul employs the exodus story, a story of God’s redeeming work, to teach the Corinthians how to be the church of God in Corinth.

D. Conclusion: Being the Church of God in Corinth D. Conclusion: Being the Church of God in Corinth

In the exodus tradition Paul finds instruction for the predominantly Gentile Corinthian church. At least for the majority of believers, the exodus would not have been a part of their collective memory that shaped how they perceived God, the world, and one another. Though some in the Corinthian church may have been Jewish, the vast majority appear to have been formerly devoted to the many gods and many lords of Corinth (12:2; 6:9–11).68 In 1 Corinthians, Paul is using the exodus tradition, read through the lens of the cross, to teach the Corinthians how to be the “church of God.” Paul’s calling the Corinthians “the church of God” thrusts a label upon them, one whose implications some may have not yet fully considered. Their overwhelming ease with the world and dis-ease with one another threatens their very survival as the church because it threatens their distinctive witness to a distinct God. Those who are being saved, those who are part of the church of God, are insiders to this new community. Paul employs various titles to describe this congregation. In 1:1, 10:32, 11:16, 11:22 and 15:9 he makes reference to the “church of God.” He also refers to believers as “saints” (6:2), “members of the body,” “members of Christ” (6:15), and “one body” (10:17). They are “Christ’s” and by extension “God’s” (3:23), a dwelling of the Holy Spirit (3:16), brothers and sisters, God’s field (3:9), God’s building (3:9), and God’s temple (3:17). To lose sight of the corporate nature of their status is to be in danger of “despising the church of God” (11:22) or failing to discern the body (11:29). Likewise, to neglect their κοινωνία with God threatens to bring one into the fellowship of demons (10:20–21). In this letter, Paul’s seemingly innocent label “the church of God” weds the reality of the Corinthian congregation to an important theological point. 68

Crispus (1 Cor 1:14) and Sosthenes (1 Cor 1:1) are Jewish names, and these may be the same synagogue leaders named in Acts 18. See Wayne Meeks, First Urban Christians (New Haven: Yale, 2003), 57. See previous discussion in Introduction.

D. Conclusion: Being the Church of God in Corinth

41

This smattering of believers of all walks of life and of varying economic levels is not merely a motley assembly. They are an assembly of God, and this qualifier has implications for how they treat one another, how they view the world, and how they view all other relationships. As an assembly of God, they are called by God to be holy (1:2; 5:6–8). As will be demonstrated in the next three chapters, exodus traditions play a key role in teaching the church how to be faithful. Chapters Two and Three examine Paul’s christocentric reading of the exodus in 10:1–22 to instruct a church to live faithfully to a fiercely jealous God. Chapter Four will turn to 5:6–8 and will study Paul’s allusion to paschal traditions to demonstrate the community’s need to live as the Spirit-filled, sanctified body whom God has called them to be.

Chapter Two

A “New” Past: 1 Corinthians 10:1–22 Part One From the beginning of 1 Corinthians, Paul wastes no time to remind the believers that they owe their very existence to the work of the Lord. God has chosen them (1 Cor 1:2, 18, 31), and it is God’s actions through the cross that define who they are (1 Cor 3:9, 16–17, 23).1 The story of the cross underscores Paul’s instructions as he intersperses various allusions to Christ throughout this letter (1 Cor 4:15–16; 5:6–8; 6:14–20; 8:10–13; 10:4, 14–17; 11:1, 17–34; 12:3, 27; 15:1–11). Perhaps the most surprising echo of the cross comes in 1 Cor 10:1–22 where Paul inserts Christ into a retelling of God’s dealings with Israel (10:4, 9). The insertion of baptismal and eucharistic imagery into Israel’s exodus story in 1 Corinthians 10 indicates Paul’s interpretation of the exodus story through the lens of the cross and through the filter of the church’s experiences. In 10:4, Paul equates Christ with the rock, the source of Israel’s sustenance, during the wilderness wanderings. This equation results in the ancestors’ partaking in Christ and, thereby, partaking in a eucharist of sorts. Likewise, although Paul does not explicitly link Moses and Christ, echoes of the Corinthians’ own baptism “into” Christ reverberate in the ancestors’ baptism “into” Moses (10:2). Finally, in 10:9, the apostle accuses the ancient Israelites of testing Christ. By interpreting the story of God’s provision for the Israelites through Christ, Paul reminds the Corinthian believers that this God, who has chosen them to be the church, has a long history of faithfulness. Through the example of another people, the “ancestors,” who also owe their existence to God, Paul shows the Corinthians what it means to be identified with this ancient God, and this faithful God requires faithfulness in return. In 1 Cor 10:1–22 Paul is deliberately evoking a story of a God who has demonstrated his faithfulness, power, and jealousy in the foundational narratives of Israel’s exodus.2 This narrative of God’s activity has radical implica1 For the importance of the “word of the cross” to Paul’s argument in 1 Corinthians see Alexandra Brown, The Cross and Human Transformation: Paul’s Apocalyptic Word in 1 Corinthians (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995); Raymond Pickett, The Cross in Corinth: The Social Significance of the Death of Jesus (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997), 1– 125. 2 See Chapter One.

A. Situating this Reading

43

tions for the Corinthian believers. In 1 Cor 10:1–13, Paul engages every facet of the Corinthians’ identity as God’s church. He grants the Gentile church a new past (10:1–5), warns them of their perilous present (10:6–11), and points them to a hopeful future (10:12–13). With these three units (vv 1– 5, vv 6–11, and vv 12–13), Paul illuminates the connection between the community’s existence and its theological foundation. First, in 10:1–5, the apostle forges a relationship between the Israelite ancestors and the Corinthian church through God who offered baptism and provided spiritual sustenance to both (note especially 10:4). In the second unit, verses 6–11, Paul warns the Corinthians to avoid following in the footsteps of their ancestors by sinning against God. The examples of this section emphasize the communal implications for those who forget, neglect, or reject the Lord. Third, after appealing to the events of Israel’s exodus, Paul concludes these warnings with the assurance of God’s faithfulness. In 10:12–13, God’s faithfulness is the source of the Corinthians’ hope to escape the pitfalls of their ancestors. With these three units – vv. 1–5, vv. 6–11, and vv. 12–13 – Paul makes it clear that the dilemma being addressed in 8:1–11:1, eating food that has been sacrificed to idols, has implications beyond the Corinthians’ failure to get along as a community. The story of the ancestors in 10:1–13 emphasizes that the Corinthians’ social disunity cannot be divorced from the theological foundation that prompted their existence as the church.

A. Situating this Reading A. Situating this Reading

Understanding the significance of God’s role in the Corinthians’ social existence requires reading 1 Cor 10:1–22 in light of its literary context. The twists and turns of Paul’s argument in 1 Corinthians 8:1–11:1 have been discussed at length and have spawned numerous theories about the constitutive parts of these three chapters and their relationship to the rest of the letter.3 This book 3

For discussions on possible divisions of the unit see J. Weiss, Der erste Korintherbrief (Göttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1910), xxxix–xliii; W. Schmithals, “Die Korintherbriefe als Briefsammlung,” ZNW 64 (1973): 263–88; idem, Gnosticism in Corinth: An Investigation of the Letters to the Corinthians, trans. John E. Steely (Nashville: Abingdon, 1971), 87–113; J. Héring, The First Epistle of Saint Paul to the Corinthians, trans. A. W. Heathcote and P. J. Allcock (London: Epworth, 1962); W. Schenk, “Der 1. Korintherbrief als Briefsammlung,” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 60 (1969): 219–43; J. C. Hurd, The Origin of 1 Corinthians (Macon: Mercer University Press, 1983), 43–47; Khiok-Khung Yeo, Rhetorical Interaction in 1 Corinthians 8 and 10: A Formal Analysis with Preliminary Suggestions for a Chinese, Cross Cultural Hermeneutic (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1995). For arguments regarding the coherence of the unit, see H. Merklein, “Die Einheitlichkeit des ersten Korintherbriefes,” ZNW 75 (1984): 153–83; C. K. Barrett, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, Harper’s New Testa-

44

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

builds upon the observations made by scholars such as Mitchell, Willis, and Fitzmyer that 8:1–11:1 forms a coherent argument.4 Furthermore, I will argue in what follows that 10:1–22 is an integral part of Paul’s instruction regarding the consumption of idol food in the temple precincts (8:1–13). 5 In

ment Commentary (New York: Harper & Row, 1968); A. Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, New International Greek Testament Ccommentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000); G. Fee, “Εἰδωλοθύτα Once Again: An Interpretation of 1 Corinthians 8–10,” Biblica 61 (1980): 172–197; idem, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), W. L. Willis, Idol Meat in Corinth: The Pauline Argument in 1 Corinthians 8 and 10, Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 68 (Chico: Scholars Press, 1985); M. Mitchell, Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation: An Exegetical Investigation of 1 Corinthians (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1991); Joop F. M. Smit, “About the Idol Offerings”: Rhetoric, Social Context and Theology of Paul’s Discourse in First Corinthians 8:1–11:1, Contributions to Biblical Exegesis & Theology 27 (Leuven: Peeters, 2000); Joseph A. Fitzmyer, First Corinthians, Anchor Yale Bible (New Haven: Yale University, 2008), 378–379. 4 Mitchell, Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation, 2–5; Fitzmyer, 1 Corinthians, 379; Willis, Idol Meat in Corinth, 4–5; Many of the debates revolve around the analysis of 10:1–22 and the examination of pre-formed pieces and traditions that may be present. For instance, Meeks’ argument for Paul’s inclusion of a pre-formed homily (10:1–13) has greatly influenced the study of this text. Meeks contends that the larger section is concerned with idolatry while only one of the transgressions in the homily fits the context, the citation of Exodus 32:7. See W. A. Meeks, “‘And Rose Up to Play’: Midrash and Paraenesis in 1 Corinthians 10:1–22,” JSNT 16 (1982): 64–78; cf. G. D. Collier, who argues that 10:1–13 was indeed a pre-formed, Christian or a Pauline-adapted non-Christian piece that is absolutely essential to Paul’s argument in 8:1–11:1 (“‘That We Might Not Crave Evil’: The Structure and Argument of 1 Corinthians 10:1–13,” JSNT 55 (1994): 55–75; cf. also L. Wills, “The Form of the Sermon in Hellenistic Judaism and Early Christianity,” HTR 77 (1984): 277–99; K. G. Sandelin, “‘Do Not Be Idolaters!’ (1 Cor 10:7),” in Texts and Contexts. Biblical Texts in Their Textual and Situational Contexts, ed. T. Fornberg and D. Hellholm (Oslo: Scandinavian University Press, 1995), 257–273; E. E. Ellis, “Traditions in 1 Corinthians,” NTS 32 (1986): 481–502; W. O. Walker, Interpolations in the Pauline Letters (London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001). There is also much debate concerning whether 10:16 preserves a pre-formed tradition. See Willis, Idol Meat, 196; H. J. Klauck, “Eucharistie und Kirchengemeinschaft bei Paulus,” Gemeinde, Amt, Sakrament: Neutestamentliche Perspektive (Würzburg: Echter Verlag, 1989), 333. 5 Even those who uphold the coherence of Paul’s argument do not necessarily treat 10:1–22 as a vital part of Paul’s rhetorical strategy. For instance, although Thiselton maintains the critical import of 9:1–27 to Paul’s advice, he is less certain of 10:1–22: “If there is a ‘digression,’ it is 10:1–13, or perhaps 10:1–22, but this remains part of Paul’s argument in which he presses a ‘worst case’ scenario, found perhaps in a minority group of extremists among ‘the strong.’” Thiselton, First Corinthians, 718. Although Thiselton may be correct that the “strong,” or perhaps more aptly-named the “knowledgeable,” are the ones most likely to consume idol meat in the local temple, Paul makes clear that this behavior has the power to influence the weak to follow their lead (8:10–13). Relegating 10:1–22 as an extreme example that does not apply to most of the congregation, therefore,

A. Situating this Reading

45

Paul’s reading of the exodus narrative in 10:1–22, the social factions created by the dilemma of eating idol meat are urged to learn from the mistakes of another group who has been chosen by God, their “ancestors.” With Paul’s recounting of Israel’s transgressions there is a wedding of social and theological concerns as he encourages the Corinthians not only to consider the needs of their brothers and sisters (8:10–13), but also to consider the need to be faithful to the God who called them (10:1–22). As Joop Smit observes, treatments of the rhetorical effect of 10:1–22 in its context tend to lean toward either the social aspect of this dilemma or the theological problems attendant with the threat of idolatry.6 Smit defines the social aspect as “the effect participation in such meals has on fellow believers” and the theological aspect as “the effect it has on the relationship with God.”7 With respect to what Smit identifies as the social aspect, Margaret Mitchell makes a strong case for Paul’s social concerns: “Thus even in taking up the specific problem of idol meats, Paul’s overriding concern is once again the unity of the church body.” 8 The social aspect of Paul’s argument is the primary aspect present in Mitchell’s treatment of this passage. She does note that Israel’s rebellions are “against the deity, against their leaders Moses and Aaron, and against one another” and that the Corinthians are called to imitate Paul as he does Christ.9 All of Mitchell’s observations serve to fuel her argument that Paul is combating factionalism. In this way, her treatment of 10:1–22 fits nicely with her overarching thesis that 1 Corinthians is a piece of deliberative rhetoric.10 By emphasizing the social nature of Paul’s rhetoric, however, some key theological points, although recognized, are neglected. The reader is left wondering whether all the theological nuggets in this passage should be read in the service of social unity. On the other end of the spectrum from Mitchell’s emphasis on social concerns, Smit argues, “It is my considered opinion that in 1 Cor 10:1–22 Paul exclusively deals with the theological side of the case. . . . Paul does not pay attention to the mutual relationship between the believers, but wholly focuses

does not consider that all in the church might be tempted by this eating dilemma, even if only a minority is presented more opportunities to dine in the local temple. 6 Smit, “About the Idol Offerings,” 121–23. See also J. Smit, “‘Do Not Be Idolaters’: Paul’s Rhetoric in First Corinthians 10:1–22,” Novum Testamentum 39 (1997): 40–53, esp. 42–43. 7 Smit, “About the Idol Offerings,” 123; idem, “‘Do Not Be Idolaters,” 42. 8 Mitchell, Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation, 147. 9 Mitchell, Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation, 1, 138, 144, 145, 147. 10 “The thesis which will be propounded, on the basis of an exegetical investigation including a rhetorical analysis of the text, is that 1 Corinthians is a single letter of unitary composition which contains a deliberative argument persuading the Christian community at Corinth to become unified.” Mitchell, Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation, 1

46

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

on their relationship with God.”11 To be fair, Smit does not negate the presence of the social aspect entirely. Instead, he sees both aspects present within 8:1–11:1. He contends that 8:1–3 and 8:7–9:27 argue at the “social level,” while 8:4–6 and 10:1–22 argue at the theological level. The problem with Smit’s analysis, however, is that the so-called “social” texts are not divorced from theological concerns or vice versa. For example, in 8:1–3, in the counterargument to those who herald their own knowledge, Paul reminds the Corinthians, “love builds up” (8:1). Since Paul is fond of using edification language to talk about the community elsewhere,12 it can safely be assumed that this verse is concerned with the strengthening of the community. This section, therefore, fits Smit’s label of the “social aspect.” However, this section is not devoid of the “theological aspect.” When Paul does explicitly link love to an entity in 8:1–3, love is directed toward God. In 8:3, Paul makes a bold theological statement: “But if one loves God, one is known by him.” Thus, love that results in the edification of the church, the social concern of Paul’s argument, is intrinsically linked here to the theological aspect of loving God and being known by God (8:1–3).13 Contra Smit, neat boundaries between the theological and social aspects of Paul’s argument are neither fruitful nor supported by the text. To force the text into an either/or perspective causes the reader to overlook some key features of Paul’s argument.14 Paul’s rhetoric in this letter shows no separation between the theological and social aspects either of the ancestral community or of the Corinthian congregation. Furthermore, in light of Mitchell’s emphasis on Paul’s concern to combat factionalism, it is necessary to stress that the social problems of the church of God are inherently theological. It is the Corinthians’ connection to God that makes this motley crew the church. Quite simply put, there is no church without God.15 According to Paul, all the 11

Smit, “About the Idol Offerings,” 123; idem, “‘Do Not Be Idolaters,” 43. 1 Cor 14:3–5,12. It is quite clear from 3:9, however, that Paul gives credit to God for the overall building. 13 With regard to 9:1–27, another section labeled by Smit as the social aspect of Paul’s argument, Paul employs christological and theological claims to support his argument. In 9:1–2, Paul upholds his own practice because the seal of his apostleship is ἐν κυρίῳ (9:2), and the congregation is a sign of his work ἐν κυρίῳ (9:1). Furthermore, he appeals to the divine authority of the law as a witness in 9:8–10, recalls the commands of the Lord in 9:14 (cf. Matt 10:10; Luke 10:7), and notes the “law of Christ” in 9:21. Paul makes it clear in this passage that it is the theological (9:9) and christological aspects that ground his argument and give him authority to offer advice that affects the social connections of the group. 14 Derek Newton makes a similar argument in Deity and Diet: The Dilemma of Sacrificial Food at Corinth (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1998), 35: “My contention is that the idol-food issue was in reality a multi-dimensional problem, not merely a social or economic or educational or theological one.” 15 1 Cor 1:2, 9, 30; 3:23. 12

B. 1 Corinthians 10:1-13: The Legacy of Faithfulness

47

congregation’s social actions toward “Jews,” “Greeks” or the “church of God” should glorify God (1 Cor 10:31–2). Consequently, it is impossible to make such tidy distinctions between the theological and social aspects when the identity and purpose of the society depends entirely upon the work of God. This chapter and the next argue that, in 1 Cor 10:1–22, Paul uses his christocentric reading of Israel’s scripture to highlight the Corinthians’ heritage in the ancient God of Israel. Understanding the theological dependence of the community’s existence is crucial to Paul’s advice concerning the consumption of idol food. In 10:1–13, the focal unit of this chapter, Paul establishes the Corinthians’ new heritage by adapting the stories of the ancestors to resonate with the experiences of the Corinthians. The examples of the ancestors’ transgressions not only have social ramifications, but, as will be demonstrated in the coming pages, each of these ancestral transgressions is directed against God. This summation of Israel’s shortcomings in 10:6–11 reveals the peril of unfaithfulness to God. In the next chapter, the focus will be on 10:14–22 where Paul connects this heritage in an ancient, faithful God to the current Corinthian quandary of eating food that has been sacrificed to idols. The social banquets that teeter on the brink of idolatry threaten to do more than create factions within the community. These idolatrous actions betray the God who called the church and threaten the Corinthians’ very identity as the “church of God.”

B. 1 Corinthians 10:1–13: The Legacy of Faithfulness B. 1 Corinthians 10:1-13: The Legacy of Faithfulness

I. 1 Corinthians 10:1–5: God-Created Unity In 1 Cor 10:1–5, Paul interweaves his instruction to the Corinthians with the experiences of the Israelites by emphasizing both groups’ interaction with the same God and each one’s participation in the same rites, a baptism and a eucharist of sorts. Though many commentators have noted the parallels between Paul’s description of the practices of the ancestors and the rituals of the church,16 a key factor often overlooked in Paul’s introduction of the ancestors is the working of the divine. The activity of God is central to Paul’s recounting of Israel’s baptism and spiritual sustenance. Paul describes the ancestors’ baptism with the qualifiers “in the cloud and in the sea” and “into Moses.” As 16

For example, see Fee, 1 Corinthians, 442; Thiselton, 725–726; Willis, Idol Meat, 129; David E. Garland, 1 Corinthians, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003), 449; Richard A. Horsley, 1 Corinthians, Abingdon New Testament Commentary (Nashville: Abingdon, 1998), 135; Raymond F. Collins, First Corinthians, Sacra Pagina (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press, 1999), 365.

48

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

will be shown below, each of these baptismal descriptions – into the cloud and sea and into Moses – binds the Israelites to the God who delivered them. Since the cloud is a metaphor of the divine throughout Israel’s scripture,17 Paul’s reference to the ancestors being “under the cloud” is a depiction of a people who exist because of God’s presence. Moreover, through Paul’s construction of baptismal language, Moses becomes a Christ figure into whose name the ancestors experience baptism. Without God, the “baptism” in the sea would not have been possible, and there would have been no provision of “spiritual” food or drink. By adding the allusions to Christ through the figure of Moses, through the rock as the source of sustenance, and even through the reference to “testing Christ” in 10:9, Paul’s addition of Christ into this exodus rehearsal situates God’s activity for God’s people in the person of Jesus. This insertion of Christ reflects the Gentile Corinthians’ own dependence on Jesus to make this “ancestral” story their own. Paul’s creative adaptation of the exodus narrative not only shows that the Israelites have participated in the same rites as the Corinthians, but these rites link both groups to the same God and even to the same Lord “through whom are all things came through whom we exist” (1 Cor 8:6). Consequently, any unity experienced either among the ancestors or among the Corinthians is a God-created unity, as the rites of baptism and eucharist well demonstrate.

1. The Rites of Baptism and Eucharist Among the Corinthians To establish the Israelites as ancestors of the Corinthian church, Paul likens the experience of Israel’s dependence upon the Lord to the Corinthians’ relationship with God. He accomplishes this correlation by interpreting the ancestors’ experiences through the lens of Christ and through the imagery of the church’s rituals. In the context of 1 Corinthians, the rituals of baptism and eucharist do more than create a common experience to unify a social group.18 Through their enactment, these rituals vivify the Corinthians’ con-

17 For example, Exod 13:21–22; 14:19–20; 33:7–11; 40:34–38; Num 14:13–17; Deut 5:22; Ps. 77:16–18; 78:14. 18 For the role of rituals in community construction see David G. Horrell, Solidarity and Difference: A Contemporary Reading of Paul’s Ethics (London: T & T Clark, 2005), 99– 115; Wayne Meeks, First Urban Christians (New Haven: Yale University, 1983), 150–57; M. Y. MacDonald, The Pauline Churches: A Socio-historical Study of Institutionalisation in the Pauline and Deutero-Pauline Writings, Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 60 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 61–71; F. Hahn, Theologie des Neuen Testaments. Band II: Die Einheit des Neuen Testaments (Tübingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 2002), 507–64.

B. 1 Corinthians 10:1-13: The Legacy of Faithfulness

49

nection to God through Christ and underscore the believers’ identity as the “church of God.”19 Paul treats baptism as a marker of a status change or a rite of initiation into a new community, and he does so by explicitly connecting the imagery of baptism to Christ.20 In 1 Cor 1:13–15, Paul highlights the connection of the Corinthians to Jesus Christ by emphatically associating their baptism with Christ in verse 13: “Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized into the name of Paul?” The inference of Christ’s name likely indicates the use of a baptismal formula. First Corinthians 12:12–13 may provide some clues as to performance of the baptismal rite.21 Paul makes it clear that the one body into which all the Corinthians are baptized is the body of Christ (12:12, 27). Here, as in the first chapter, Paul emphasizes the appeal to unity in the body by reminding the Corinthians that they were all baptized into this one body and were made to drink of one Spirit. Furthermore, Paul links this rite to the activity of God. In the context of the baptismal formula of 1 Corinthians 12, God is the one who has arranged the organs in the body (12:18). God is responsible for the body’s composition (12:24). God has appointed each member a task in the body (12:28), and “the same Spirit,” “the same Lord,” and “the same God” inspire everyone with gifts to use for the body’s edification (12:7). In 1 Corinthians, this connection to God through Christ is exhibited through baptism’s role in forging the Corinthians’ identity as the “church of God.” This connection is made from the beginning of the letter. Before broaching the subject of the church’s divisions, Paul reminds the Corinthians of their identity as the “church of God” (1:2) and appeals to God’s faithfulness (1:9). After acknowledging the Corinthians’ divisiveness (1:10–17), Paul undermines their boastfulness with a testimony of God’s power to call 19

Jonathan Z. Smith claims that ritual is an assertion of difference (To Take Place: Toward Theory in Ritual [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987], 109). The rituals of baptism and eucharist enact a story that differs from the gods of the Corinthians’ environment, particularly the gods in whose temples some of the Corinthians may be dining. By enacting the rituals of baptism and eucharist as opposed to other rituals, the Corinthians are affirming belief in the story of the God who called them and who worked decisively through the cross. See also George Allan, The Importances of the Past: A Meditation on the Authority of Tradition (Albany: State University of New York, 1986), 237; Michael Fishbane, Text and Texture: Close Readings of Selected Biblical Texts (New York: Schocken Books, 1979), 121. For more on the power of ritual see the discussion in Chapter Four. 20 As an initiation rite see Meeks, First Urban Christians, 150–57; for a study of Paul’s discussions of baptism around 1 Cor 12:12–13; Rom 6:1–12; and Gal 3:27–28 see M. O. Fape, Paul’s Concept of Baptism and Its Present Implication for Believers (Lewiston: Mellon, 1999). 21 For a discussion of 12:12–13 and baptismal practices see Thiselton, 1 Corinthians, 995–1001; cf. Fee, 1 Corinthians, 604. See also Gal 3:28; Rom 6:1–12.

50

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

and to use what the world deems foolish (1:18–2:6). The Corinthians, who are characterized as boasting in their baptism, are reminded that they owe their very existence to God (1:31). As 1 Cor 3:23 states, “you are Christ’s and Christ is God’s.” Paul’s linking of baptism to God’s activity in Christ and to the believers’ shift in identity is congruent with his discussions of baptism in Rom 6:1–12 and Gal 3:27–29.22 Romans 6:1–12 makes the link of baptism to Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection explicit. Participation in this act of Christ’s death makes one “alive to God in Christ Jesus” (Rom 6:11). Within the context of the baptismal formula in Gal 3:27–29, Paul argues that “in Christ Jesus you are all children of God, through faith” (3:26). The believers are “Christ’s” and, through Christ, “Abraham’s seed, heirs according to the promise” (3:29). Thus, in Galatians Paul argues that baptism marks their “clothing” in Christ (3:27). As J. Louis Martyn argues, “For he [Christ] is the ‘place’ in which the baptized now find their corporate life.”23 The believers’ new identity is found only in Christ, who is the seed of Abraham (3:16), and only through Christ are they “heirs.” Like baptism, the eucharist also connects the believers to God through Christ and symbolizes an identity shift into members of a new κοινωνία. The only references that Paul makes in his letters to the practice of the Lord’s Supper occur in 1 Cor 10:16–17 and 11:23–26. As with baptism, the rite of eucharist connects the believers to God through participation in Christ’s death (10:16–17; cf. Rom 6:1–12). In 10:16, Paul refers to the “cup of blessing” and the broken bread in conjunction with participation or κοινωνία in the blood and body of Christ.24 Likewise, in 11:23–26, the performance of the Lord’s Supper enacts the night of Christ’s death and binds the participants in covenant with him (τοῦτο τὸ ποτήριον ἡ καινὴ διαθήκη ἐστὶν 11:25). Underlying the performance of the ritual is the tradition of Christ’s death that Paul has handed on to them (11:23).25 Furthermore, the enactment of Christ’s death through the meal serves as an act of proclamation of Jesus’s death “un-

22

For indications that that Paul’s references to baptism assumed more widespread practice see A. J. M. Wedderburn, Baptism and Resurrection: Studies in Pauline Theology Against Its Greco-Roman Background, WUNT 44 (Tübingen, Mohr [Siebeck], 1987), 37– 69. 23 J. Louis Martyn, Galatians, Anchor Bible 33A (New York: Doubleday, 1997), 376. 24 Determining the appropriate translation of κοινωνία is difficult. Horrell has insightfully indicated that the word conveys not only a communal dimension (the so-called “horizontal” dimension), but also indicates a relationship with God (or the “vertical” dimension), Solidarity and Difference, 107. 25 For language of the passing on of a tradition, see Ellis, “Traditions in 1 Corinthians,” 481. Cf. 1 Cor 11:2.

B. 1 Corinthians 10:1-13: The Legacy of Faithfulness

51

til he comes” (11:26).26 In the context of 1 Cor 11:17–34, those who fail to carry out this covenant enactment in a “worthy manner” are accused of despising the church of God (11:22).27 Thus, engaging unworthily in this rite endangers one’s status within the church and threatens to expose one’s identity as an outsider. In sum, through baptism and eucharistic practice, Paul associates the performance of these rites with the community’s relationship to God through Christ and establishes the community’s identity as the “church of God.” 2. The Rites of Baptism and Eucharist Among the “Ancestors” Paul’s appeals to the practices of baptism and eucharist in light of the Corinthians’ experiences is not unexpected, but his use of baptismal and eucharistic language to refer to the experiences of the Israelites requires far more imagination. Israel’s scriptures never refer to the crossing of the sea as a “baptism.” Furthermore, it is anachronistic to claim that the Israelites, who crossed the sea and who wandered in the wilderness, have partaken of a ritual that enacts the death and resurrection of a first-century figure. It is through these rites, however, that Paul rhetorically demonstrates how God has merged the stories of the ancestors with the story of the Corinthians. Because the rites of baptism and the Lord’s Supper link the participants to God through Christ, the Corinthians can claim the Israelites as “ancestors.” This connection of kinship is a rather bold claim. Making the claim even bolder is the interweaving of Israel’s baptismal and eucharistic experiences with a retelling of the exodus narrative. The exodus narrative is a foundational narrative of Jewish identity.28 Paul, however, links this story of Jewish origins—a story of God’s activity to form and to preserve a people—with the story of Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection through the rites of baptism and eucharist. Thus, related to the importance of baptism and eucharist to describe the Israelites’ experiences is the bold reference to “our ancestors” in 10:1. In short, in 1 Cor 10:1–5, those who were formerly unrelated find kin-

26

See Beverly Roberts Gaventa, “‘You Proclaim the Lord’s Death’: 1 Corinthians 11:26 and Paul’s Understanding of Worship,” Review and Expositor 80 (1983): 377–387. 27 Regarding the relationship of Christ and God in 1 Corinthians, Paul equates Christ with the “power of God and the wisdom of God” (1:24). God is the “source of your life in Christ Jesus, whom God made our wisdom, our righteousness and sanctification and redemption” (1:30). Likewise, “you are Christ’s; and Christ is God’s” (3:23). Although Paul interweaves the work of God with the cross of Christ, Paul still speaks of the two individually: “There is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist” (8:6). 28 See Chapter One.

52

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

ship through the divine. To investigate the rites of eucharist and baptism for the Israelites first requires a closer look at what Paul means by ancestors. 3. “Our Ancestors” In the instructional paradigm of 1 Cor 10:1–22, Paul does not evoke the Corinthians’ biological ancestors or even the mythical ancestors of their GrecoRoman culture. Paul summons a set of ancestors who, until now, have had no real “ancestral” link with the Corinthian Gentiles. He narrates a story that was used for generations to instruct and to inform Jewish children of the God who chose them and who delivered their people from the hands of their oppressors. What is shocking about this strategy is that Paul recalls this story of Israel’s ancestors and does not merely instruct the Gentile Corinthians, but tailors the story to mirror the believers’ experience and to draw them into a heritage that had not been theirs by birth. His lengthy rehearsal of the exodus carefully echoes the Corinthians’ own experiences in a way that suggests that the ancient Hebrews and the Gentile Corinthians have much in common. As noted in Chapter One, it was not uncommon for Jewish readers to reinterpret the exodus in light of their current situation. Even compared to Philo, who freely adapts the exodus tradition, though, Paul’s adaptation of Israel’s exodus to sound like baptism and even eucharist is peculiar.29 In 1 Cor 10:1, Paul introduces this rather bizarre rehearsal of Israel’s exodus wanderings with the curious phrase, “our ancestors.” Many commentaries argue that the church is somehow “spiritually” connected to these chosen people or even transformed into Israel.30 Certainly, in Gal 3:28–29 Paul makes a connection between the believers and the heirs of Abraham.31 Hays argues that “the ‘Israel’ into which Paul’s Corinthian converts were embraced is an Israel whose story had been hermeneutically reconfigured by the cross and resurrection.”32 Paul’s exodus rehearsal in 10:1–13 is filtered through the lens of the cross (10:2–4, 9). Is it appropriate, though, to speak of this motley crew of bickering believers as “Israel,” when Paul never explicitly calls them such in this letter? The Israelites are “ancestors” of the Gentile Corinthians 29

See survey in Chapter One. Richard B. Hays, Conversion of the Imagination (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 5. See Fitzmyer who says that Christians are for Paul “in a new sense ‘the Israel of God’ (Gal 6:16)” (1 Corinthians, 380); Craig Keener refers to the Corinthian believers as “spiritual proselytes” who have been grafted into Israel’s history (1–2 Corinthians, The New Cambridge Bible Commentary [New York: Cambridge University, 2005], 84); Collins, 1 Corinthians, 365; David E. Garland, 1 Corinthians, 448; Fee, 1 Corinthians, 444. 31 See also Gal 6:16. 32 Hays, Conversion of the Imagination, 9; cf. Collins, 1 Corinthians, 365: “Notwithstanding their ethnicity Paul has virtually coöpted the Gentile Christians of Corinth into the Jewish community.” 30

B. 1 Corinthians 10:1-13: The Legacy of Faithfulness

53

only through God. 33 This connection to God is the link that Paul is exploiting in 10:1–22. In a culture saturated with stories of mythical ancestors and especially of multiple ancestral gods,34 the apostle urges these new believers to seek guidance from the mistakes of an alien set of ancestors and, even more importantly, the stories of a fiercely jealous ancestral God. Paul uses the ancestral stories to demonstrate to the Corinthians what it means to be identified with this same God. In his introduction to “our ancestors” (10:1–5), Paul emphasizes that all the ancestors, like all the Corinthians, were participating in rites that symbolized their connection to God. A form of πᾶς occurs five times in the first four verses, indicating that all the ancestors (οἱ πατέρες ἡµῶν πάντες) were “under the cloud” (v. 1), “all passed through the sea” (v. 1), “all were baptized” (v. 2), “all ate” (v.3), and “all drank” (v. 4). This emphasis on “all” the people serves at least two functions in Paul’s argument. First, it demonstrates the common experience of every Israelite. All participated in these events that were rooted in God’s salvation, yet, as the text will soon reveal, the wilderness community was still divided as some were led astray (vv. 5–11). Second, all the ancestors mirrors all the Corinthians. All in the Corinthian church have also participated in baptism: καὶ γὰρ ἐν ἑνὶ πνεύµατι ἡµεῖς πάντες εἰς ἓν σῶµα ἐβαπτίσθηµεν, εἴτε Ἰουδαῖοι εἴτε Ἕλληνες εἴτε δοῦλοι εἴτε ἐλεύθεροι, καὶ πάντες ἓν πνεῦµα ἐποτίσθηµεν (1 Cor 12:13; cf. 1:13). Likewise, Paul insists that all the Corinthians have shared in the eucharist: οἱ γὰρ πάντες ἐκ τοῦ ἑνὸς ἄρτου µετέχοµεν (1 Cor 10:17b; cf. 11:17–34). Finally, all the Corinthians claim some knowledge and experience in this same God who allowed all Israel to pass through the sea (1 Cor 8:1, 6). Yet, while the reference to all the ancestors mirrors the experience of all the Corinthians, it is also significant that this church’s practices of baptism and eucharist have fostered divisions in the community. Based on Paul’s characterization of the divisions in the slogans of 1:12 and on his reaction to these slogans in 1:13–17, there appears to be disunity in the congregation surrounding the Corinthians’ esteem for certain leaders, particularly those with the authority to perform baptism.35 After introducing the divisions in 1:10–12, Paul highlights the baptismal rite and challenges the Corinthians: “Were you baptized into the name of Paul?” (1:13b). Although the apostle 33

See also Irenaeus, Against Heresies 4.27.4; Thiselton, 1 Corinthians, 724. See Bruce Winter, “Theological and Ethical Response to Religious Pluralism: 1 Cor 8–10” Tyndale Bulletin 42.2 (1990): 209–226; See also Chapter One. 35 Even if Paul exaggerates the divisions, Paul’s reproof of the Corinthians’ affinity for certain leaders resurfaces again explicitly in 3:1–4:21 with this section culminating in Paul’s reminder to this church that he is their loving father (4:15). The Corinthians’ squabbles over leaders and leadership styles will certainly be a source of contention in 2 Corinthians 10–13, but issues over leadership occur throughout the Corinthians correspondence. See 1 Cor 1:10–17; 3:1–4:21; 9:1–2; 2 Cor 3:1–3; 5:1–11; 10:1–13:10. 34

54

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

declares that baptism is not a primary aspect of his ministry, he also notes his role in baptizing prominent figures in the Corinthian congregation—Gaius, whose house is large enough to host the whole congregation (1 Cor 1:14; Rom 16:23), Crispus, who may be the same synagogue ruler mentioned in Acts (1 Cor 1:14; Acts 18:8), and Stephanus, whose household was first among the Achaian converts and who has proven his devotion to the service of the church (1 Cor 1:16; 16:15–18). While Paul only baptized a few, his remarks assume that all in the audience have been baptized. In fact, he will appeal to their common baptism as a source of unity in 12:12–13. All the Corinthians, therefore, could identify with this rite, and the practice of baptism provided a tangible link to their new “ancestors.” With the allusion to the eucharist in 10:3–4, Paul recalls another rite that has caused factions within the church. All Israel ate the same spiritual food and the same supernatural drink. Presumably all the Corinthians have partaken of the Supper, since Paul appeals to the unifying nature of the meal in 10:16–17. In 11:17–34, however, the apostle devotes several verses to admonishing them with regard to table practices. Clearly, the Lord’s Table is an occasion where the divisions in the congregation are visible. There is no indication in the text, however, that the Israelites were divided over these practices of baptism or eucharist. Paul here seems to be emphasizing the abilities of these rites to foster unity with one another and fellowship with the divine. As a result, by the end of verse four, the Corinthians and the ancestors look much alike. 4. The Ancestors’ Baptism The highly imaginative portrayals of Israel’s baptism and “eucharist” demonstrate the lengths to which Paul will go in order to reveal to the Corinthians their common ground with these foreign people. The Septuagint nowhere refers to the crossing of the sea as a “baptism.” In fact, the Israelites’ exodus stories emphasize the dryness of the seabed in their safe passage to the other side (Exod 14:21–29).36 In contrast to the Israelites’ dry crossing, baptism by any standard seems to have involved the baptizand getting wet, whether through whole or partial immersion or through some act of sprinkling.37 In 1 Cor 10:1–2, however, Paul uses the term βαπτίζω to refer to the Israelites’ waterless passage and reckons their “immersion” through the parted water as a symbolic baptism.

36 See also Artapanus in Eusebius, Praep. Evang. 9.27.36; cf. Josephus, A.J. 2.338–44; Philo, Mos 1.176–80. 37 C. K. Barrett notes that there may have been some connection of the sea crossing to baptism in Jewish thought regarding proselyte baptism (1 Corinthians, 221).

B. 1 Corinthians 10:1-13: The Legacy of Faithfulness

55

5. Baptism into Moses In 10:2 Paul claims that all were baptized “into Moses” (εἰς τὸν Μωϋσῆν). The reference to Moses provides a more tangible anchor to the apostle’s imaginative interpretation of Israel’s crossing as a baptism. Evoking Moses lends authority to Paul’s argument by including a name that would have already been widely associated with Israel’s origin myth. Furthermore, since antiquity was a highly-prized commodity in the ancient world,38 this ancestral link intertwines this seemingly new religion to a God who has been acting faithfully throughout the ages. Recognizing this ancient story as one’s own would have demonstrated that the faith of the Corinthians was not “new.” While they have been aligned with a recently-crucified messiah, they are also aligned with a God of ancient history, a God who was present with Moses. Moses is a key figure in the exodus narratives because of his role as divine mediator and deliverer, and it is this divinely appointed, Christ-like role that Paul emphasizes in this verse. The fact that Paul includes the name of Moses is worth pondering. As mentioned above, the prominence of Moses as a figure in the ancient exodus narrative would certainly be a logical excuse for Paul to mention him here. The reference to Moses in 10:2, however, is not necessary to evoke exodus imagery in 1 Cor 10:1–5. In the exodus rehearsal in Wisdom 11, for instance, the author simply refers to “a holy prophet” (11:1) with no mention of a proper name. If the name were lifted out of 1 Cor 10:2, there would be enough allusions to the exodus to understand which event in Israel’s history the apostle is illustrating. In Paul’s argument, Moses stands in a similar position to Christ. Gary Anderson highlights Moses’s Christ-like role in the exodus drama as one who stands in the breach between God and unfaithful Israel.39 Moses recalls God’s saving acts to the people and reminds God that he has indeed called these people his own (“Let not your anger, O Lord, blaze forth against your people, whom you delivered from the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand” Exod 32:11). Even though God prom38

According to Cicero, “The strength of Rome is founded on her ancient customs as much as on the strength of her sons” (Resp. V,1). See H. I. Marrou, A History of Education in Antiquity, trans. George Lamb (London: Sheed and Ward, 1956), 231; Louis H. Feldman, Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World: Attitudes and Interactions from Alexander to Justinian (Princeton: Princeton University, 1993), 177; regarding the role of antiquity in education: “Across the multiplicity of forms and modes of Roman Greek education, one feature remained common: the attempt to root all forms of status and identity in the prestigious past,” Tim Whitmarsh, Greek Literature and the Roman Empire: The Politics of Imitation (London: Oxford University Press, 2001), 6; cf. Werner Jaegar, Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture, trans. G. Highlet (New York: Oxford UniversityPress, 1939). 39 Gary Anderson, “Moses and Jonah in Gethsemane: Representation and Impassibility in Their Old Testament Inflections,” in Seeking the Identity of Jesus: A Pilgrimage (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), 216–224.

56

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

ises to save Moses alone (Exod 32:10), Moses stands in solidarity with the people (“your people” Exod 32:11; 33:13–14) and appeals to God’s own covenant (“Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, your servants, how you swore to them by your own self, saying to them, “I will multiply your descendants like the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have promised I will give to your descendants and they shall inherit forever.’” Exod 32:13). In Exodus 32, it is Moses’s action on the people’s behalf that prompts God to relent. According to Anderson, Moses not only represents the people, but by recalling God’s own promises he represents part of God to God: “Moses is a necessary actor in the narrative that depicts God’s character. The identity of God would be different without him.”40 As both a representative of the people and a representative of God’s own character in the Exodus 32 drama, Moses serves as a Christ-like figure, who is willing to give himself to atone for the sin of the people (Exod 32:32).41 Paul has already adapted Israel’s story by interpreting the passing through the sea as a “baptism.” The specification that the ancestors have been baptized “into (εἰς) Moses” appears to be another deliberate Pauline modification of the exodus narrative.42 As C. K. Barrett argues, since “into Moses” has no Jewish parallel, this construction was created by Paul to mirror the baptismal formula “into Christ.”43 Through this analogous baptismal formula, Moses is a type of Christ figure into whom the ancestors are “baptized” in much the same way as the Corinthians have been baptized into (εἰς) Christ.44 The grammatical construction of 10:2 provides an important clue for this parallel. It is customary for Paul to use the preposition εἰς with a form of βαπτίζω even though the preposition is difficult to render here into proper English. This is the same preposition that he employs in 1:13b: “or were you baptized into the name of Paul? (ἢ εἰς τὸ ὄνοµα Παύλου ἐβαπτίσθητε; cf. 1:14–15). Paul also employs this preposition with a form of βαπτίζω to refer to baptism “into” (εἰς) Christ in Gal 3:27 and Rom 6:3 and even “into” Christ’s death in 40

Anderson, “Moses and Jonah in Gethsemane,” 220. Anderson, “Moses and Jonah in Gethsemane,” 223. 42 John Lierman speculates that the phrase “baptism into Moses” could have been influenced by Jewish proselyte baptismal practices and may actually predate Paul’s use (The New Testament Moses: Christian Perceptions of Moses and Israel in the Setting of Jewish Religion, WUNT 173 (Tübingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 2004), 277. Barrett, however, denies that there is any evidence to support this speculation (1 Corinthians, 221). 43 C. K. Barrett, 1 Corinthians, 221. 44 Cf. 1 Clem 53. Moses’s appeal to God to die with the people rather than allow God to destroy them was exemplary (53:4–5), but Clement does not merely employ this story to call for the reconciliation of factious groups. Moses serves as the paradigm of what it means to confess God, and Clement explicitly links the confession of God with the appropriate sacrifice of praise: a broken spirit (52:2–3). Moses spends forty days and forty nights in “fasting and humiliation” (53:2), and this pleases the Lord (53:3). 41

B. 1 Corinthians 10:1-13: The Legacy of Faithfulness

57

Rom 6:3.45 In Gal 3:27 and Rom 6:3, Paul interprets baptism as an act that does not connect one to a particular leader, as Paul’s rhetorical question in 1 Cor 1:14–15 might suggest, but to Christ. Another important factor in this Moses-Christ analogy is the role that Moses enjoys in Jewish traditions. In his argument for the centrality of Moses at the center of the Jewish faith, John Lierman asserts, “It appears that Jews can have thought of their loyalty, hope, and faith being given in some fashion both to God and to Moses. The vitality of this idea in the first century . . . may suggest something of how the early Christians found the way to a settlement between their monotheism and their devotion to Christ.”46 In Israel’s scripture, Moses serves as a revealer of God to the Hebrew people, and his role as mediator is only made possible because God has chosen him to serve as the Israelites’ deliverer.47 Moses is the voice of God, the mediator of God’s covenant, and the advocate of the people.48 He is the one who meets God in the burning bush and learns the name of this God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.49 In the Exodus account, he is the most important human figure in the saga of the foundation of Israel because he is the mediating character between the Lord and the people.50 The Lord makes Moses an integral figure in the exodus events by using him to plead with Pharaoh, by giving him authority to perform wonders in God’s name, and by granting him the opportunity to come close to the divine.51 The Lord has chosen Moses to be his voice to this people. In the Hellenistic period, the character of Moses is still linked to divine revelation. For example, Moses’s intimate connection with God was exploited by Artapanus, a Hellenistic Jewish writer who wrote a highly romanticized account of Moses’s life. Artapanus neglects to mention Moses’s role as lawgiver, but does credit him with dividing the state into thirty-six nomes and appointing the god to be worshipped in each nome (Praep. Evang. 9.27.4). Furthermore, Artapanus mentions that the Egyptian priests deemed him worth of divine status, and some even identified him with the god Hermes (Praep.

45 Contra William B. Badke’s argument that the relationship between the dying-rising Christ was not common knowledge when Paul wrote to Rome from Corinth (“Baptised into Moses – Baptized into Christ: A Study in Doctrinal Development”) EvQ 60 (1988): 23–29. 46 Liermann, The New Testament Moses, 277–278. 47 Exod 3:1–4:17; 6:28–7:7. 48 For example, Exod 19:1–25; 32:30–35; 33:7–23. 49 Exod 3:1–22. 50 So also Carol Meyers, Exodus (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 12– 13. See R. S. Hendel, “Exodus in Biblical Memory,” JBL 120 (2001): 615–20. 51 For example, Exod 3:7–22; 4:1–17, 29; 5:1–3, 22–23; 6:1–12; 7:1–5, 14–18; 8:1, 5, 8, 12–13, 16, 20–23, 30; 9:1–4, 13–19; 10:1–2, 21–23; 11:1–10; 12:28; 14:13–14; 15:1–18; 16:6–8; 19:1–25; 33:7–23.

58

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

Evang. 9.27.6).52 In Artapanus’s account, this connection with the divine veers drastically from the biblical account, but demonstrates that Moses had become a larger-than-life character, a man associated with divine revelations (even the revelation of Egyptian and Greek gods) and, in some circles, the face of Judaism.53 Like Artapanus, other Hellenistic Jews took liberty in portraying Moses as a mediator of the divine. Philo, for instance, did not lose sight of Moses’s most important role as a revealer of God to the Hebrew people. Philo portrays Moses as a priest (Mos. 2.66–108), a prophet (Mos. 2.246-258), and a divinely appointed king (Mos. 1.148-154). When Moses is fearful to speak before the congregation, Philo explains this fear: “But though he [Moses] believed the words of God, nevertheless he tried to avoid the office to which God was appointing him, urging that he was a man of a weak voice, and slow of speech, and not eloquent, and especially so ever since he had heard God himself speaking” (Mos. 1.83). Philo likens Moses’s intimacy with God to a pupil who studies with his master in private (Mos. 1.80). It is because of this intimacy that God appoints him for the task to speak God’s words to the people (Mos. 1.84). As these Hellenistic Jewish accounts reveal, the status of Moses as God’s prophetic voice and God’s mediator had continued to develop well into the Hellenistic period. Hellenistic Jews were not the only ones, however, who considered Moses as a revealer of the divine. Even the Egyptian polemical writer Manetho recognized Moses’s prominence as a religious leader and his role as a mediator of divine law to the Jewish people. Manetho linked Moses to a priest of Heliopollis named Osarsiph who commanded his followers to avoid worship of the Egyptian gods, to destroy sacred animals, and to abstain from joining themselves to anybody except those of his confederacy. Manetho accused this Moses figure of using his colony of leprous and impure people to make war against Egypt and of establishing the laws that began the Jews’ “misan-

52

Artapanus also embellished Moses’s other leadership skills to paint him as a particularly wise and respected leader, e.g., inventing “boats and devices for stone construction and the Egyptian arms and the implements for drawing water and for warfare, and philosophy” (Praep. Evang. 9.27.4). 53 This statement assumes that Artapanus’ audience may be either Hellenistic Jews or Greeks. For discussions of the various purposes and audiences see John M. G. Barclay, Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora from Alexander to Trajan (323 B.C.E.–117 C. E.) (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1996), 127–32; John J. Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem: Jewish Identity in the Hellenistic Diaspora (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 37–46; Erich S. Gruen, Heritage and Hellenism: The Reinvention of Jewish Tradition (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998), 155–160; for the extent of the use of Moses as a revealer of the divine in non-scriptural sources see John G. Gager, Moses in Greco-Roman Paganism (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1972).

B. 1 Corinthians 10:1-13: The Legacy of Faithfulness

59

thropic” behavior (that is, not associating with outsiders).54 In this way, Moses is given credit for linking this people with a God who prompted the odd behavior that effectively defined their group and set them apart among the nations. Thus, even by a non-Jew, the importance of Moses is connected to his role in revealing the wishes of the divine. Moses’s role in Israel’s stories is, above all, as a revealer of God to the people, and there is evidence in the Corinthian correspondence to suggest that these believers have some knowledge of this facet of Moses’s character.55 In 2 Cor 3:7–18, Paul appeals to Mosaic traditions without citing a single Old Testament verse. He alludes to the story of Moses’s veil and assumes that his audience is somewhat conversant in these traditions.56 In the rhetoric of this passage, Moses literally reflects God’s glory. He is the representative of the Lord to the people, and he mediates God’s laws. Simply put, Moses is a “steward of God’s mysteries.” In 1 Cor 10:2, Paul’s appeal to the name of Moses is consistent with how he employs the figure of Moses in 2 Corinthians 3 as a mediator of God’s glory. Moses is a Christ-figure in Paul’s baptismal parallel.57 Like the Corinthians, the ancestors were baptized into a name that has been a revealer of the divine. As will be shown in the next section, Paul will further emphasize Moses’s role as God’s agent by noting that the baptism of all the people occurred “in the cloud and sea.” 54

This accusation continues in Tacitus, Historiae 5.3.1–4.2. Consider also the related charges of misanthropy by Diodorus Siculus 40.3.4, Apollonius Molon (Ag. Ap. 2.148), Lysimachus (Ag. Ap. 1.304–11), and Apion (Ag. Ap., 2.92–96). 55 According to David M. Hay, there are more explicit references to Moses in the New Testament than to any other Old Testament figure (“Moses Through New Testament Spectacles,” Interpretation 44 [1990]: 240). Hay has surveyed these instances and argued that the appearance of Moses in the New Testament often rests on his role as mediator of divine revelation, although Hay notes that this revelation is often interpreted by New Testament writers as “comparatively inferior to the revelation given in Jesus” (245–248). For more on portrayals of Moses see John M. G. Barclay, “Manipulating Moses: Exodus 2.10–15 in Egyptian Judaism and the New Testament,” in Text as Pretext: Essays in Honour of Robert Davidson, ed. Robert P. Carroll (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1992), 28–46; K. Haacker and P. Schäfer, “Nach-biblische Traditionem vom Tod des Mose,” in Josephus-Studien: Untersuchungen zu Josephus, dem antiken Judentum und dem Neuen Testament: Otto Michel zum 70sten Geburstag gewidmet, ed. Otto Betz, Klaus Haacker and Martin Hengel (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1974), 147–74; W. Meeks, The Prophet King: Moses Traditions and the Johannine Christology (Leiden: Brill, 1967); H.W. Attridge, The Interpretation of Biblical History in the Antiquitates Judaicae of Flavius Josephus (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1976), 143–44. 56 For a discussion of what the Corinthian congregation may have known about scriptural traditions, especially the exodus, see the Introduction. 57 Lierman claims, “As Christians sought to establish Jesus in the same pivotal position that Jews ascribed to Moses, they found in Moses a template for describing the kind of figure they believed Christ to be.” (The New Testament Moses, 279).

60

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

6. Baptism “in the Cloud and in the Sea” As Paul made clear in 1 Corinthians 1–4, the Corinthians’ baptism meant that they belong to Christ (and thus to God, 3:23). In 10:2 Paul links the ancestors’ baptism to divine activity with a qualifying phrase: “in (ἐν) the cloud and in the sea.”58 Paul does not bother to name the sea nor to mention the Gentile army whom God defeats in the sea. The focus here is neither Israel’s enemy nor Israel’s location at the time, both of which are miles away from the world inhabited by the Corinthians. The reference to the sea in 10:2 is easy enough to relate to God’s act of bringing Israel safely through the Red Sea.59 The importance of the cloud, however, presumes some knowledge on the part of the audience.60 Although the cloud itself has a long tradition in Israel’s exodus narratives,61 Paul adapts this tradition by linking the cloud with the act of baptism (10:2) and with God’s presence with the ancestors, since all were “under the cloud” (10:1). Somehow, according to Paul, the Israelites are baptized in this physical manifestation of the Lord’s presence, even though Israel is never explicitly said to have been “baptized in the cloud” in scripture. This Pauline adaptation serves to emphasize God’s work on behalf of the ancestors and situates their existence in the faithful activity of this all-powerful God. In the story of Israel’s exodus the cloud represents both the revelation and the concealment of the Lord. The Lord’s visitations in the cloud spark a turning point in the story of Israel’s plight from Egypt. After all, it is the Lord, manifested through the cloud and fire, who sees the pursuing Egyptian army, wreaks havoc in the enemy’s camp, and collapses the walls of the sea to swallow Israel’s pursuers (Exod 14:21–29). The pillar of cloud is God’s presence guiding (Exod 13:21–22; Ps. 78:14), protecting (Exod 14:19–20; Ps. 77:16–18; 105:39), and journeying with his people (Exod 40:34–38; Numbers 10:36 LXX). It is the visible sign of the divine speaking with Moses at the tent of meeting and the physical manifestation of a theophany (Exod 33:7–11; 40:34–38; cf. 2 Cor 3:12–18).62 God’s presence in the cloud distinguishes this people from other nations (e.g., Num 14:13–17; 23:9). In Exodus 33:12– 16, when Moses is speaking with the Lord in the tent of meeting, the leader reminds God of the importance of God’s presence with the people: “For how 58

Note that Paul does not employ εἰς in reference to the cloud and sea. He reserves this preposition for the name of Moses. See discussion above regarding Paul’s customary use of εἰς with βαπτίζω (e.g. Rom 6:3; 1 Cor 1:13, 15; 12:13). 59 Exod 14:1–15:21; cf. Wis 10:17–21; 19:1–9. 60 For a discussion of what the Corinthian congregation may have known about scriptural traditions, see discussion in the Introduction. 61 For example, Exod 13:21–22; 14:19–20; 33:7–11; 40:34–38; Num 14:13–17; Deut 5:22; Ps 77:16–18; 78:14; 105:39. 62 Cf. Mark 9:7; Luke 9:34–36; Matt 17:5.

B. 1 Corinthians 10:1-13: The Legacy of Faithfulness

61

will it be known that I have found favor in your sight, I and your people, unless you go with us? In this way, we shall be distinct, I and your people, from every people on the face of the earth” (33:15b–16). The presence of the cloud demonstrates that God alone leads this people into the blessings of the future. The cloud also exhibits God’s mysteriousness. Even Moses is not allowed to look upon the face of God (Exod 33:17–23), and when the cloud descends upon the tent of meeting, the people remain at the entrance of their own tents (Exod 33:10).63 As the Lord’s presence envelops Sinai in a cloud, the people gather at the base of the mountain, but are not allowed to break through the cloud and smoke to catch a glimpse of the Lord (Exod 19:16–25).64 In Deut 5:22, the Lord’s voice booms out of the fire, the cloud, and the darkness on the mountain to address the assembly of all the people, and the people are amazed at the sound (vv. 24–27): “For who is there of all flesh that has heard the voice of the living God speaking out of fire, as we have, and remained alive?” (Deut 5:26). God’s presence in this cloud is holy and mysterious, and the Lord’s presence with this people sets them apart.65 The reference to the cloud in 1 Corinthians 10 is a reminder that the existence of the ancestors as a people and, indeed, the existence of this Corinthian community are both due to God’s activity. God, in the metaphor of a cloud, is responsible for the Israelites’ safe passage through the sea. Without the presence of God, Israel would not be a distinct people (Exod 33:15b–16). God’s presence in the midst of this people set apart this nomadic people from all the nations. Without God’s guidance and faithfulness, Israel has no hope for future blessings. By including two references to the cloud in his description of the ancestors in 1 Cor 10:1–2, Paul emphasizes the Lord’s presence with these people. 7. The “Eucharist” of the Israelites Paul also exercises his creative license when portraying the Israelites’ food and drink as a type of eucharist. Three times Paul uses the term πνευµατικὸς in reference to the food and the drink of the ancestors. The third use describes the rock, the source of their spiritual drink (10:4). Although Israel’s scripture records that Moses struck the rock for the water to flow,66 Paul does not associate Moses’s activity with the rock’s provision of water. Instead the focus is on Christ, whose appearance in this narrative marks a clear Pauline adaptation of the exodus traditions. 63

See also Deut 31:14–15. See also Exod 24:15–18; cf. Lev 16:2. 65 See also Ps 99:7. 66 Exod 17:1–7; Num 20:2–11; cf. Ps. 78:15–16, 20; 105:41; 114:8; Isa 48:21. 64

62

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

All the ancestors shared the same supernatural food and the same supernatural drink. In Israel’s traditions, the Israelites’ meal was composed of manna (Deut 8:3) and later quail (Exod 16:8,12; Num 11:1–35; Ps 78:21–31), provided daily by the Lord to test the Israelites’ trust in God’s provision and their reliance upon the Lord alone (Exod 16:4; Deut 8:3). Furthermore, their drink gushed from the rock by the command of the Lord (Exod 17:5–7; Deut 8:15; Num 20:7–11). Partaking of this supernatural nourishment bound the Israelites together by a common experience.67 Without this food and drink, the Hebrews could not have survived in the desert. The food was a tangible reminder that their continued existence was tied to the Lord’s provision. Paul interprets the story of Moses’s striking of the rock through the lens of the Corinthian’s eucharist experience. The story of the rock is arguably not as essential to the exodus narrative as one might consider the sea crossing to be. In contrast to the daily provision of manna or quail, in the biblical narrative the striking of the rock is a one-time event. Paul, however, is likely influenced by a tradition similar to Pseudo-Philo’s flinty rock that follows the Israelites and serves as a constant source of drink.68 Nowhere in Israel’s scriptures, though, is the Messiah equated with the rock from which God made water flow for the Hebrews in their wilderness wanderings.69 Writing Jesus Christ into this exodus tradition demonstrates Paul’s liberty to adapt the story to meet his rhetorical needs.70 The pay-off of this innovative rhetorical 67 Remembering this common experience would shape their identity for years to come. Consider, for example, the recurrence of the exodus traditions in Deut 1:1–6:25 and the recital of these events as a reminder that God has chosen this people and preserved them (Deut 7:7–11). Consider Pss 78; 106. See also Alan Kirk, “Social and Cultural Memory,” in Memory, Tradition, and Text: Uses of the Past in Early Christianity, ed. A. Kirk and T. Thatcher (Atlanta: SBL, 2005), 1–24. 68 Pseudo-Philo, L.A.B. 10.7; 11.15; 20:8; cf. Leg. 2.86. For a comparison of Philo and Paul’s use of the rock and the connection of the rock to wisdom, see L. Kreitzer, “1 Corinthians 10:4 and Philo’s Flinty Rock,” Communio Viatorum 35 (1993): 109–126. Cf. Wis 11:4–8. 69 Cf. Sukkah 3:11; Tg. Onq. Num 21:16–20; For discussions on Paul’s hermeneutics in 1 Cor 10:4 see Peter Enns, “The ‘Moveable Well’ in 1 Cor 10:4: An Extrabiblical Tradition in an Apostolic Text,” BBR 6 (1996): 23–38; H. Wansbrough, “Jewish Methods of Exegesis in the New Testament,” SNTSU 25 (2000): 219–244; A. McEwen, “Paul’s Use of the Old Testament in 1 Corinthians 10:1–4,” VR 47 (1986): 3–10; Ellis, “Traditions in 1 Corinthians,” 481–502. 70 As Francis Watson has well demonstrated, Paul’s liberties with Israel’s scriptural traditions are analogous to how his Jewish contemporaries also adapt sacred texts to meet their own purposes. “The basic hypothesis is that engagement with scripture is fundamental to Pauline and non-Christian Jewish theological construction, and that these ‘early Jewish’ texts, Christian or otherwise, can therefore be located within a single intertextual field – not in spite of their interpretative differences, but precisely because of them.” (Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith [London: T & T Clark International, 2004], 5).

B. 1 Corinthians 10:1-13: The Legacy of Faithfulness

63

move is that the Israelites, like the Corinthians, are imbibing Jesus. By equating Christ with the water-gushing rock, Paul’s retelling links the source of the ancestors’ life to Christ. By rehearsing the exodus narrative in this way, Paul acknowledges the merger of these two peoples – the Israelites and the Corinthians – by God’s work through Christ. Through this connection in Christ, the Israelites are indeed the church’s “ancestors.” Both are recipients of God’s deliverance. Both have found their source of life in Christ. Both are wandering in the presence of the God who chose them, and both are placing their hope in God’s future blessings. 8. Summary: Revisiting 1 Corinthians 10:1–5 and Hearing the Dire Warning In 1 Cor 10:1–5, Paul carefully incorporates the Gentile church into Israel’s heritage and makes some pronounced additions to any known version of Israel’s exodus. The rhetorical result of 10:1–5 is the wedding of two peoples through the same God. The apostle introduces his extended example of Israel’s wilderness warnings with some creative ritual connections that function to portray the commonality between the ancient Israelites and the contemporary Corinthians. The section begins with a reference to “our ancestors” and quickly relates key points about these ancient people: all were under the cloud (10:1), all passed through the sea (10:1), all were baptized (10:2), and all ate supernatural food and drink (10:3–4). To solidify the bond between these ancient Hebrews and the contemporary Corinthians, Paul stresses that the people of Israel, whom he does not call by name until 10:18, have much in common with the people whom God has called to be saints. In the brief introduction to his larger argument of 10:1–22, Paul rhetorically forges a bond between the ancestors and the Corinthians through the activity of God. He portrays the Israelite ancestors in light of the Corinthians’ experiences of baptism and eucharist, rites that symbolize the Corinthians’ relationship to God through Christ. Paul creatively links the ancestors to Christ first by portraying the ancestors as being baptized into Moses, a Christ-like figure, and then by making the outrageous claim that the source of the ancestors’ supernatural drink is Christ. The references to the cloud stress the ancestors’ relationship to God. These connections to God and Christ also reflect the Corinthians’ own relationship with the divine. In sum, Paul creatively weaves the foundational story of the cross – as symbolized in the practices of baptism and eucharist – with the foundational narrative of Israel’s exodus. The purpose of this creative storytelling is to prepare the Corinthians to learn from their ancestors’ mistakes (10:6, 11). Verses 1–4 are critical to the drastic turn that Paul makes in 10:5: “But with most of them God was not pleased; for they were overthrown in the wilderness.” In spite of all that God

64

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

has done for the ancestors, the ancestors have failed to be faithful to God. The God who has created this people is a fiercely jealous God (10:22). Most of the ancestors were destroyed in the wilderness. At the end of 10:5, Paul has the Corinthian audience wondering, “Why was God not pleased with our ancestors?” The Corinthian audience should be struck by the similarities to these ancestors in 10:1–4, but shocked at the revelation in verse 5, that, in spite of the reality that all the Israelites had been baptized and had received spiritual sustenance from Christ, God was not pleased with most of them. For those in the audience who are boasting in their own knowledge or congratulating themselves for also experiencing baptism and partaking of the Lord’s table, the destruction of their ancestors, with whom they have much in common, would be a stunning revelation. They, after all, were called by this same God who destroyed most of the ancestors. Now, Paul rhetorically has them in a place to listen to what they need to do to avoid being “overthrown” like their ancestors. II. 1 Corinthians 10:6–11: Learning from the Mistakes of Our Ancestors Paul has carefully introduced the Corinthians to their ancestors for the purpose of instructing the church to avoid some of the same mistakes made by the Israelites. Like the Corinthian church, the Israelites were chosen by God, and God was among them. Yet, some of the Israelites took God’s provision and presence for granted, and Paul tells the readers in 10:5 that God was not pleased with most of them. Having already experienced God’s deliverance, these ancestors were overthrown in the wilderness and not permitted to see the promised land (1 Cor 10:5). By bracketing the examples of the ancestors with the explicit warning that these stories were written for the church’s instruction (1 Cor 10:6, 11), Paul urges the Corinthians to heed the lessons of their ancestors. In 10:6–11, Paul mentions four ways in which the ancestors are desirous of evil things: committing idolatry, engaging in sexually immoral behavior, putting Christ to the test, and grumbling, presumably, against the Lord and the Lord’s servants. There are many points of correlation between these specific ancestral transgressions and the Corinthian community.71 Richard Hays observes that most of the transgressions cited in 10:6–11 are problems plaguing the Corinthian church, particularly: idolatry (8:1–13; 10:14), sexual immorality (5:1–13; 6:12–20; 7:2–5), and putting Christ to the test (8:1–13).72 Although Hays is cautious to link grumbling, mentioned in 10:10, to the spe71

Contra Meeks’s assertation that the homily’s point is “general” (“Rose Up to Play,”

99).

72

Hays, 1 Corinthians, 164–65.

B. 1 Corinthians 10:1-13: The Legacy of Faithfulness

65

cific controversies of the Corinthian church,73 it seems that throughout this section Paul has in mind some of the divisive issues troubling this congregation, and grumbling is certainly among them (consider 1:10–17). By recalling Israel’s transgressions that reflect those of the Corinthian community, Paul is again situating these Corinthians in the same scenario as the wandering Israelites. Paul’s appeal to Israel’s behavior, however, reveals that there is much more at stake in the Corinthians’ actions than whether or not they simply offend one another and cause disunity. Causing one’s brother or sister to stumble is likened to destroying the fellow believer and sinning against Christ (8:12). Furthermore, each transgression points beyond the behavior itself and bears witness to the community’s relationship to the faithful God who chose this people. As Paul reminds the Corinthians in 3:23, “you are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s.” In 10:6–11 Paul confronts the threat of the community’s factionalism with an urgent appeal to be faithful to the faithful God who chose them. As this study will demonstrate, the transgressions listed in 10:6–11 not only affect the unity of the ancestral community,74 but these acts of unfaithfulness threaten the testimony of the community as the people of God. In 10:1– 22, Paul links the existence of the community, the ancestors’ faithfulness to God, and God’s steadfast faithfulness. This section argues that each of the transgressions listed in 10:6–11 are not merely issues that divide the ancestral community, but each transgression fails to take seriously the community’s utter dependence upon the one true God. Since this community’s identity is wrapped up in the identity of this God, the unfaithfulness of most of the ancestors threatens the identity and existence of this people as the people of God.

1. The Ancestral Examples Paul explicitly employs the ancestors’ transgressions for the church’s instruction by bracketing the examples with warnings in verses 6 and 11. At the beginning of this section of exodus allusions, he urges the Corinthians to pay 73 Hays admits that the issue of grumbling in 1 Cor 10:10 is the most difficult to correlate with the Corinthians’ dilemmas. He does speculate that the grumbling against Moses as alluded to in Numbers 14 may correlate with grumbling against Paul, but ultimately Hays claims, “There is not enough information given in the text to make a confident decision about whether Paul’s final illustration is specifically related to the controversies at Corinth or whether it is simply a general homiletical remark based on the wilderness narratives.” (Hays, 1 Corinthians, 165). 74 As Margaret Mitchell has well demonstrated. See Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation, 138–149. Mitchell’s emphasis on factionalism, however, causes her to neglect how Israel’s behavior is a rebellion against God (138).

66

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

attention: “Now these things are examples (τύποι) for us, that we might not crave evil as they did.” Again in verse 11: “Now these things happened to them as an example (τύπικῶς), but they were written down for our instruction, upon whom the end of the ages has come.” In both verses, Paul uses a form of the Greek word τύπος to describe the ancestral transgressions and the relationship of these transgressions to his instructions for the church. There has been much discussion on the meaning of τύπος.75 The Revised Standard Version translates this term as “warnings” while other translations prefer “examples” or “types.” Other interpreters have opted for “patterns”76 or “formative models.”77 In a recent study of τύπος that compared its use by Paul with its occurrence in later patristic writings, Steven DiMattei concludes that typology is a later Christian hermeneutic and that Paul’s use of the term better resembles appeals to historical exempla seen in Jewish hermeneutical practices around the first century and Hellenistic models that refer to narratives for edification and instruction.78 The patristic typological hermeneutic simply has not yet been developed. According to DiMattei, Paul instead sees biblical narratives as instructive models for his audience. Moreover, K. H. Ostmeyer contends that τύπος is a relational concept that holds two phenomena in parallel.79 The similarities between Adam and Christ in Rom 5:14 would serve as an example here and as a check to how parallel the two phenomena really are. Paul claims that Adam is a “type” of the one to come. According to Brendan Byrne, Adam is a type “in the sense that he is a figure of universal significance for the remainder of the race; his one act breathed an influence affecting the destiny of ‘man’ (= ‘all’).”80 Byrne argues that only this similarity makes Adam a type of Christ, because Paul will go on in Romans 5 to display the superiority of Christ to Adam. Thus, Paul’s use of “type” should not be read as an exact parallel of two phenomena or people, but as an indicator of commonality between the two. In 1 Cor 10:1–22, the two phenomena are two groups of people who have much in common: the Corinthians and the ancestors. Both have been called by God and fashioned 75

For an overview see Leonhard Goppelt, “τύπος,” Theological Dictionary of the New Testament 8:248 and G. Schunack, “τύπος,” Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament 3:374. 76 Richard B. Hays, 1 Corinthians, Interpretation (Louisville: John Knox, 1997), 162. 77 Schunack, “τύπος,” 374. 78 Steven DiMattei, “Biblical Narratives,” in As It Is Written: Studying Paul’s Use of Scripture, ed. S. E. Porter and C. D. Stanley (Atlanta: SBL, 2008), 59–93. 79 K. H. Ostmeyer, “Typologie und Typos: Analyse eines schwierigen Verhältnisses,” NTS 46 (2000): 112–131. Likewise, Walter R. Roehrs investigates places where Paul uses some form of the word τύπος and concludes that τύπος refers to a point of view or a hermeneutic that establishes a relationship between two events (“The Typological Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament,” Concordia Journal 10 [1984], 204–216, esp. 212). 80 Brendan Byrne, Romans, Sacra Pagina (Collegeville; Liturgical Press, 2007), 178.

B. 1 Corinthians 10:1-13: The Legacy of Faithfulness

67

into a people. Furthermore, as W. R. Roehrs indicates, there is some correlation between the issues plaguing the Corinthians and the highlighted transgressions of Israel.81 The correlations between the Israelites and the Corinthians are intended to instruct the Corinthians to avoid the transgressions of their ancestors. Paul’s appeal to Israel’s exodus as an instructional tool for future generations finds support in a much earlier reading of the exodus narrative. In Psalm 78, the psalmist includes an exodus rehearsal that highlights many of the same elements included in Paul’s retelling: the provision of the rock (vv. 15–16, 35; cf. 1 Cor 10:4), the presence of the cloud (v. 14; cf. 1 Cor 10:1, 2), the passage through the sea (v. 13; cf. 1 Cor 10:1), miraculous provision (vv. 11–12, 23–29; cf. 1 Cor 10:3, 4), the cravings of the people (v. 30; cf. 1 Cor 10:6), the testing of the Lord (vv. 18–20, 41–43, 56–57; 1 Cor 10:9), the destruction of the transgressors (vv. 31, 34, 59–67; 1 Cor 10:5, 8–10), and the sin of idolatry (v. 58; 1 Cor 10:7, 14). Since there are many correlations between Paul’s allusions and the retelling by the psalmist, it is certainly possible that Paul has been influenced by this psalm, though this influence cannot be proven. What is significant about the parallel, however, is that Psalm 78 provides an example of the exodus being used to instruct future generations in a similar way that Paul uses Israel’s transgressions to instruct the Corinthian “descendants.”82 The psalmist’s use of ancestral narratives to instruct future generations is an important biblical precedent for Paul’s use of scripture in 1 Corinthians 10. How these stories are used in Ps 78 is telling of the importance of Israel’s narratives to mold the behavior of the community. The psalmist characterizes all the transgressions of the Israelites as acts of faithlessness (vv. 57– 58).83 The writer commands his audience to tell this tale to the coming generations so that they will know of God’s power and might: “I will teach you hidden lessons from our past – stories we have heard and known, stories our ancestors handed down to us. We will not hide these truths from our children but will tell the next generation about the glorious deeds of the Lord. We will tell of his power and the mighty miracles he did” (78:2b–4). The rehearsal of ancestral stories is directly linked to instructing the children in the identity of this God who gave his law to Israel (v. 5) in order that “each generation can set its hope anew on God remembering his glorious miracles and 81

Roehrs, “The Typological Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament,” 212. In a comparison of the use of Numbers in 1 Cor 10 and Wisdom of Solomon, Francis Watson argues that both Paul and the author of Wisdom use Israel’s traditions paradigmatically for their own readers, although according to Watson they diverge in their assessment of the overall shape of the traditions (Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith, 383). 83 See also Ps 106:6, 7, 13, 21, 40. The psalmist equates all Israel’s mishaps as sins and rebellions against the Lord. 82

68

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

obeying his commands” (v. 7). The goal of this retelling is clearly articulated in Ps 78:8: “Then they will not be like their ancestors – stubborn, rebellious, and unfaithful, refusing to give their hearts to God.” If each generation remembers the mistakes of the ancestors, then perhaps they will not forget the God who delivered their ancestors, provided for them, and made them a people (vv. 11, 35, 42–43). In short, telling stories is a way to remember the Lord and the Lord’s faithfulness. In a similar manner to the psalmist, Paul places in antithesis the faithlessness of some of the ancestors and the faithfulness of God.84 Like Psalm 78, Paul highlights transgressions that reveal a rejection of God’s law, a denial of God’s provision, and distrust of God’s guidance.85 In 1 Cor 10:6–11, Paul lists serious charges against some of the Israelites: craving evil, engaging in idolatry, indulging in immorality, testing the Lord, and grumbling against God and his servants. In every case, like the early interpretation by the psalmist, the ancestral transgressions are examples of unfaithfulness to God. Although the psalmist envisioned helping later Jewish generations avoid the faithlessness of their ancestors, Paul instructs these Gentile “descendants” to learn from the disloyalty of these same ancestors. As 1 Cor 10:1–4 establishes, the Israelites have experienced God’s salvation. Baptized into Moses and nourished by Christ, they are all “under the cloud.” The Lord has already demonstrated a decisive victory at the sea, but the sea serves only as a first-fruit of God’s victory on behalf of his people. The Israelites are out of bondage, but not yet in the land of promise. Paul places the Corinthians in precisely the same tension between the current experience of God’s salvation and the expectation of the coming kingdom and coming judgment.86 In 10:11, he reminds the Corinthians that they are positioned at the end of the ages, a time not only associated with the fruition of God’s kingdom (6:9), but with impending judgment as well.87 By casting the Corinthians in a similar situation as corporate Israel in the wilderness, Paul implies that “some” of the church may be acting like “most” of Israel who were unfaithful. If the Israelites’ unfaithfulness resulted in their destruction

84

In a similar manner to his argument in Rom 3:1–8, esp. verse 3b–4a: “Does their faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of God? By no means!” 85 Similarly, in Josephus’ recounting of God’s provision of the quail, he interprets the ensuing destruction in which “no small number of them died” as divine punishment for the people’s insolence A.J. 3.295–299. Likewise, in A.J. 4.40–50, Josephus rehearses the exodus narrative in such a way that displays God’s power and faithfulness and highlights Moses as a servant of God. 86 Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale, 1989), 97. 87 Consider 1 Cor 1:7–8; 3:13–15; 4:5; 5:5; 6:2, 9–11, 14; 7:29, 31; 10:11; 11:32; 15:24, 42–56.

B. 1 Corinthians 10:1-13: The Legacy of Faithfulness

69

in the desert, then the Corinthians’ unfaithfulness might also provoke God’s jealousy (1 Cor 6:9–10; 8:10–13; 10:22). 2. The Ancestral Transgressions The ancestral transgressions have already been introduced in verse 5: “But God was not pleased with most of them, for they were overthrown in the wilderness.”88 Verse 5 stands in sharp contrast to verses 1–4, which emphasized the ancestors’ solidarity, by introducing two interrelated ideas: faction and faithlessness. Verse 5 contains the first sign of division in the ancestral congregation, and it is also the first mention of God’s displeasure. This verse effectively pivots the ancestral portrait away from the unifying rituals of baptism and eucharist and forces the reader to ponder what brought about God’s anger and how the factions in the congregation might be prompting God’s displeasure. Although 10:7 contains the only explicit reference to idolatry, unfaithfulness to the Lord lies in the background of all the transgressions cited in verses 8–10.89 Verse 6 forms an introduction to this unit and, along with verse 11, frames this section of Israel’s transgressions. The references to Israel’s wilderness wanderings recall specific trespasses that come after a general heading at the end of verse 6: “not to desire evil as they did.” After the citation in verse 7, the following verses fall into a pattern. In verses 8–10, the charges allude to certain behaviors that “some of them” (τινες αὐτῶν) did, and each transgression is coupled with its dire consequence: “We must not do x as some of them (Israel) did x, and y (a terrible event) happened to them.” This basic pattern highlights the purpose of the allusions: to discourage behavior within the Corinthian congregation that resulted in some of Israel being overthrown in the wilderness (v. 5).

88

Cf. the indeterminate amount of destruction mentioned by Josephus, A.J. 3.295–299. Clement of Rome, who is reading Paul’s own use of Israel’s exodus in response to factions in the church, highlights features of the exodus narrative that Paul’s retelling evokes in less explicit ways. While Paul cites Exodus 32 and warns the Corinthians to avoid idolatry, he does not overtly blame the Israelites for fashioning the molten image, as 1 Clement does in 53:2. Likewise, though Paul will plead with the Corinthians to flee from idolatry and will mention several ways that God overthrew some of the Israelites in the wilderness, he does not convey God’s spoken desire in Exodus 32 to annihilate the people and to start anew with Moses. In 1 Clem 53:2, however, the Lord accuses the people of the iniquity of going astray from his commandments and making gods for themselves. According to 1 Clement’s reading of the golden calf story, God no longer wants to claim the Israelites as his people because they have been disloyal to his ways. God no longer wants his identity to be linked to a “stiffnecked” people (53:3). 89

70

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

a. Craving Evil Verse 6 comes on the heels of verse 5’s claims that God was not pleased with “most of them.” This whole group, “most of them” who were overthrown in the wilderness, is “desirous of evil things.”90 There are multiple scriptural traditions to which Paul could be alluding. The language of craving evil echoes the language of Num 11:4, a passage in which the people are lamenting the lack of meat in the wilderness journey and are longing to return to Egypt where they had plenty of fish to eat.91 Interestingly, according to the writer of Numbers, the Lord interprets the people’s complaints as a rejection of the Lord who has been with them all along (Num 11:20).92 Numbers 11 is not the only record of the Israelites’ “craving” of meat, nor is it the only text where this craving is equated with Israel’s lack of faith in the Lord. In Ps 106 (LXX 105) the Israelites’ “craving” is associated with forgetting the God who saved them and exchanging God’s glory for that of an image (106:14, 20–21). Furthermore, in Ps 78, the psalmist regards the craving of meat as sign of the people’s unbelief, distrust (78:22) and unfaithfulness (78:8). In each of these scriptural traditions, the craving of meat is associated with unfaithfulness. Likewise, in A.J. 3.295–299, Josephus also interprets the Israelites’ desire for meat as insolence against God and equates their destruction with divine punishment. In 1 Cor 10:6, Paul does not explicitly say that the ancestors were craving meat, but craving evil things (ἐπιθυµητὰς κακῶν). Since the larger situation that sparked Paul’s exodus retelling is the consumption of idol food, one might think that Paul would exploit the connection between Israel’s meat craving and the Corinthians’ dilemma of eating meat that had been offered to idols.93 As seen in the brief survey above, many of the recordings of God’s provision of meat relate the craving of food to distrusting God and forgetting God’s provision (Ps 106:20–21; 78:8, 22; Num 11:20). As Francis Watson argues, “In 1 Corinthians 10:6–11, ‘desire’ is no longer tied to the single story about the Israelites’ desire for a more varied diet. A number of incidents of rebellion and death in the wilderness are here invoked in order to substantiate the warning that we are not to be ‘desirers of evil things,’ as they desired.”94 Watson sees “desire” as the root of Israel’s problems and as the 90

See Num 11:34 “graves of craving”; cf. Josephus, A.J. 3.299; See Collier (“‘That we might not crave evil,’” 63–64) who argues that the allusion to Num 11:4, 34 in v. 6 exemplifies the main point of this text. 91 Mitchell describes Num 11 as an etiological narrative built on the Hebrew root for “desire” [‫( ]והא‬Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation, 138–139, n. 439). See also Meeks, “‘And Rose Up to Play,’” 64–78, 68. 92 Cf. Num 14:11. 93 See also Watson, Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith, 365. 94 Watson, Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith, 364.

B. 1 Corinthians 10:1-13: The Legacy of Faithfulness

71

overarching heading under which all the other transgressions listed in 7–10 might be placed.95 He summarizes his argument as follows, “In each of these incidents of idolatry, immorality, testing and complaining, the people of Israel show themselves to be ‘desirers of evil.’” 96 In sum, “evil things” can be equated with each of the transgressions in verses 7–10. Building upon Watson’s argument, it is important to note that it is not simply “desire,” but the people’s distrust of God and forgetfulness of God’s care that lies at the heart of their cravings. Their evil cravings are truly “evil,” meaning, that they are antithetical to God and God’s provision.97 As will be shown below, within the contexts of each of the passages to which Paul alludes in verses 6–10, scripture equates the transgressions of the people with acting in a way that is antithetical to the commands of God. It is not difficult, therefore, to see how Paul might interpret the ancestors’ cravings with the cravings of “evil things.” The introductory warning not to crave evil demonstrates that each of the transgressions listed in verses 6–10 are not simply divisive for the community, as Mitchell maintains,98 but are indeed markers of the people’s unfaithfulness to the Lord. In these ancestral transgressions, faction and faithlessness work hand in hand. b. Idolatry Paul only includes one direct citation of Israel’s scriptures in 10:1–13, and this citation comes from Exodus 32. In 10:7, Paul includes a quotation from the ultimate manifestation of Israel’s idolatry, the creation of the golden calf.99 The quotation serves to illustrate and to define the first part of the verse. “Being idolaters” is likened to the actions of the Israelites sitting down to eat and to drink and rising up to play. Although Paul introduces the quotation by enjoining the church to avoid such behavior, the citation itself has no

95

For Watson, desire leads to death, as in Romans 7:7–11. Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith, 384. 96 Watson, Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith, 367. 97 Josephus’ interpretation repeatedly extols the role of the Lord in the provision of the people, A.J. 3.295–300, 302, 309, 312; 4.13; and, alternatively, God’s punishment of the people for their insolence A.J. 3.299, 311–312, 321, 4.8, 14–56. 98 Mitchell, Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation, 138–139. 99 See Pseudo-Philo’s retelling of the golden calf and the centrality of idolatry in L.A.B. 12.1–10. For a discussion on “the dangers of divided loyalties” in Pseudo-Philo’s “rewritten Bible” see Bruce N. Fisk, Do You Not Remember? Scripture, Story and Exegesis in the Rewritten Bible of Pseudo-Philo, Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha: Supplement Series 37 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 2001), 50–53. Regarding Israel’s action at Sinai as a fundamental act of disloyalty to God, see Terence E. Fretheim, Exodus, Interpretation (Louisville: John Knox Press, 1991), 282.

72

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

explicit reference to idolatry, as Hays points out.100 Paul assumes some knowledge of the setting of this citation in order for the Corinthians to make the necessary connections between the general warning against idolatry and the specific citation from the golden calf story.101 The portion of the Exodus passage cited by Paul echoes the Corinthians’ dining before idols. If idolatry here is equated to eating, drinking, and playing before an idol, then Paul’s rehearsal of Exodus 32 correlates with the Corinthians’ circumstances of eating food that has been sacrificed to idols in the precincts of the local temples (8:1–13).102 By eating, drinking, and playing in the presence of other gods or goddesses, they are failing to allow the story of God to shape them exclusively.103 Paul’s inclusion of idolatry in his list of ancestral transgressions implies that neither the ancestors nor the Corinthians have taken into account the exclusive claim of the Lord upon their lives. Only God had rescued the Israelites from the hands of their oppressors. The Lord was willing to form a covenant with the ancestors, to be in their midst across the wilderness, and to provide a land that only God could deliver.104 As John Durham argues in his interpretation of the severity of the golden calf saga, “The special treasurepeople whose identity has been established by the arrival in their midst of the Presence of Yahweh himself are suddenly in danger of becoming a people with no identity at all, a non-people and a non-group fragmented by the centrifugal forces of their own selfish rebellion and left without hope in a land the more empty because it has been so full of Yahweh’s own Presence.”105 Fortunately, as Durham mentions, the Lord acted mercifully and restored the covenant with this people. Durham’s interpretation, though, underscores a 100

Hays, 1 Corinthians, 167; see also Watson, Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith,

365.

101

So also Hays, 1 Corinthians, 167; Watson, Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith, 365. For more on the Corinthians’ situation, see the next chapter. 103 1 Clement, written around the turn of the century (c. 96 C.E.), provides an early record of the interpretation of Paul’s Corinthian correspondence and an important glimpse at how the story of the golden calf reminds the factious Corinthian congregation of their common ground of faith and hope and the expectations placed upon them due to their confession of the one true God. Like Paul, Clement invites his readers to remember the perilous situation created by the unfaithfulness of some of Israel (53:1). Dating can range from 80–140 C.E. See the following: L. W. Barnard, “The Early Roman Church, Judaism, and Jewish-Christianity,” Anglical Theological Review 49 (1967): 371–84; Donald A. Hagner, The Use of the Old and New Testaments in Clement of Rome, Novum Testamentum Supplements 34 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1973); Horacio E. Lona, Der erste Clemensbrief, Kommentar zu den Apostolischen Vätern 2 (Göttingen, Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998); Oskar Skarsaune, In the Shadow of the Temple: Jewish Influences on Early Christianity (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2002), 210–12. 104 Cf. Ps 106:19. 105 John I. Durham, Exodus, WBC 3 (Waco: Word, 1987), 417–418. 102

B. 1 Corinthians 10:1-13: The Legacy of Faithfulness

73

vital point. This people’s identity and existence are forever bound to this God who made them a people. The Corinthians, perhaps unwittingly, have failed to realize that their own identity as a church is wrapped up in the work of this same God. Through their risk of provoking the Lord’s jealousy (10:22), the Corinthians are acting carelessly like the Israelites by not taking seriously the worship of the true God and one Lord who brought about their deliverance (8:6). Like the Israelites, who were accustomed to seeing gods represented as mute idols, the Corinthians’ inundation with the religious experiences of their own culture threatens to skew their worship of the one true God and situates them in a precarious position, teetering on the brink of idolatry.106 c. Porneia Sexual immorality, the subject of 10:8, displays the unfaithfulness of some of the ancestors to God. Paul exhorts the Corinthians to avoid sexual immorality (µηδὲ πορνεύωµεν) by alluding to a story from Numbers that recounts the Israelites’ intermarriage with Moabite women. This intermarriage led to the Israelites’ unfaithfulness to the Lord. In Numbers 25, the Lord destroys thousands of people due to their idolatrous worship of Baal, the god of the Moabite wives.107 Although idolatry itself is a serious offense against the Lord, Josephus concludes that the idolatrous behavior threatens their distinctiveness as a people. In A.J. 4, Josephus recalls the intermarriage of the Midianite women with the Israelites and portrays these women as a rather crafty group who manipulate the Jewish men into forsaking their own customs and participating in foreign ones, particularly the worship of other gods. “Since these things have been agreed to by you,” they [the Midianite women] said, “and since you follow customs and a way of life that is most contrary (ἀλλοτριώτατα) to everyone, even as your food is of a peculiar type (ἰδιοτρόπους) and your drink is not common to others, it is necessary, if you wish to live with us, for you also to worship (σέβειν) our gods; and there cannot be another proof of the affection that you declare to have now toward us, and of what will be, than to bow down before (προσκυνεῖν) the same gods that we do. No one would reproach you if you turned to the particular gods of the very land to which you have come—and that when ours are common to all, but yours is acknowledged by no one else.” Therefore, they said that it was necessary for them either to think the same as all others or to seek another place to dwell where they would live alone with their peculiar laws (A.J. 4.137–138).108

106

See next chapter. While Num 25:9 records that 24,000 were killed. Num 26:62 records 23,000. 108 Cf. the translations of L. H. Feldman, Flavius Josephus: Translation and Commentary, ed. S. Mason (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 379–80 and H. St. J. Thackeray, Josephus, Loeb, 8 vols. (London: William Heinemann, 1930), 543. 107

74

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

The reality that the Jewish men were different from all other peoples (ἀλλοτριώτατα) in the worship of their God is central to the women’s plea in this text. According to Josephus’s interpretation, the women required the men to sacrifice their distinctiveness in order to marry them. The men succumbed to the women’s pleas, worshiped foreign gods, ate the strange food of the foreigners, and neglected the commandments of their God. They abandoned the God who had established their nation. Josephus interprets this act of disloyalty as a threat to the distinctiveness of the entire Jewish nation. According to Josephus, the young men allowed their infatuation with the Midianite women to cause them to transgress their own laws, and consequently they sacrificed to foreign gods, ate foreign foods, and attempted to please these foreign women (A.J. 4.139). Josephus accuses them of creating sedition throughout the camp and, even worse, claims that the young men’s actions threatened “the complete destruction of their peculiar practices” as a people (A.J. 4.140). What began, therefore, as lust for the Midianite women turned into the abandonment of the ancestral customs, the very customs that distinguished the Israelites as a people who served a peculiar God. In the scriptural narrative, adultery, idolatry, and unfaithfulness are intertwined, and it seems that these concepts are intertwined in Paul’s logic as well. The Corinthians are struggling with sexual immorality (5:1–13; 6:12– 20). In 5:6–8, Paul seems most concerned that this promiscuity threatens the purity of the whole community.109 Furthermore, engaging in porneia is not an individual offense but an offense against the whole body of Christ (6:12– 20), since every individual in the body has been bought with a price (6:19– 20). Porneia may also play a direct role in Paul’s advice regarding the consumption of idol food in the temple precincts (8:1–13). If the knowledgeable are dining at the local temples, as indicated in 8:1–13, then Bruce Winter suggests that sexual promiscuity may have followed the meal since prostitutes were sometimes supplied for grand banquets in after-dinner revelry.110 If the meals at the temple precinct included the “after-dinners,” then Paul’s appeal to avoid sexual immorality is directly linked to the larger dilemma of the tempting atmosphere accompanying eating meat offered to idols at the local temples. While such promiscuity might be acceptable to the god of the temple, this behavior is not in any way indicative of the God who called the believers (cf. 6:12–20). As Paul reminds the Corinthians in 6:17, “The one who is united with the Lord is one spirit” with him. Those who have participated in the cup of blessing and the body of Christ are one with the Lord (10:16–17). What one member does in the body affects the body as a whole (5:1–13). Just as the Israelites’ porneia was equated with their rejection of 109

See Chapter Four. Bruce W. Winter, After Paul Left Corinth: The Influence of Secular Ethics and Social Change (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), 281. 110

B. 1 Corinthians 10:1-13: The Legacy of Faithfulness

75

the Lord and their unwillingness to live in accordance with the Lord’s commands, in Paul’s argument, the consequences of porneia cannot be divorced from the Corinthian community’s larger identity as God’s temple (6:19). d. Testing Christ The transgression of verse 9, putting Christ to the test, continues the portrait of ancestral unfaithfulness, but with startling language. The manuscript evidence is divided on whether or not “Christ” is the one who is put to the test. The earliest witness (p46) and a number of others read “Christ.”111 Other witnesses, often deemed reliable, vary on this issue. Codex Alexandrinus includes θεόν,112 and Codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus κύριον. These later variations echo Israel’s scriptures and are probably harmonizing. Putting the Lord to the test recalls the destruction of some by serpents in Numbers 21. The people complain against the Lord’s provision in the wilderness, and God sends poisonous snakes to plague them (Num 21:6–7; 1 Cor 10:9). Realizing that the snakes were sent by God, the people tell Moses that they are being punished for speaking against the Lord (Num 21:6–7). Furthermore, the retellings of exodus traditions in Psalms 78 and 106 both equate the actions of the Israelites as putting God to the test (Ps 78:18, 41, 56; 106:14; cf. 78:8, 37). Based on Paul’s allusions to Israel’s exodus traditions, there is rationale for conforming Paul’s language to these exodus traditions and deliberately recalling the people’s testing of the Lord. As Metzger argues, “The difficulty of explaining how the ancient Israelites in the wilderness could have tempted Christ prompted some copyists to substitute either the ambiguous κύριον or the unobjectionable θεόν.”113 According to Metzger, since Paul inserts Christ into the story in 10:4, it seems more reasonable that Paul is deliberately inserting Christ into the story in verse 9.114 Putting Christ to the test reads the plight of the ancestors through the lens of the Corinthians’ situation, as Paul has been doing throughout 10:1–13.115 The Corinthians are the ones in danger of putting Christ to the test through their actions of eating and drinking in an idol’s temple. Paul relates the dilemma of eating meat offered to idols to a matter of testing Christ when he reminds the Corinthians in 8:4–6 that there is only one God: “but for us one 111

Along with some early “Western” texts (e.g., D F G). For the designation “Western,” Bruce Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (Stuttgart: United Bible Society, 1971), xxix. 112 Along with a paucity of other manuscripts. 113 Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 560. 114 Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 560. The argument, however, could also be made that a scribe inserted the reference in verse 9 due to the insertion of Christ in verse 4. 115 See also Hays, 1 Corinthians, 165.

76

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and we exist through him” (8:6). Their status in Christ has implications for their life together as the church. In 8:10–13, Paul warns them that causing someone with a weak conscience to be led astray is tantamount to sinning against Christ. Their flirtation with idolatry threatens to test Christ and places them in the perilous position of all the Israelites who rejected the Lord either through blatant idolatry or through speaking against God and thereby testing the Lord (Num 21:4–5; Ps 78:18, 41, 56; 106:14).116 As Paul asks them in 10:22: “Shall we provoke the Lord to jealousy?” e. Grumbling Paul introduces the transgression of grumbling in verse 10. This vague reference to grumbling is not as easily linked to a specific reference in Israel’s exodus traditions. Indeed, grumbling against the Lord or against Moses and Aaron, the Lord’s servants, appears quite frequently in Israel’s Scriptures (e.g. Exod 17:3; Num 11:1; 14:27, 29; 16:41; 17:5; Ps 106:25). Two main possibilities are often cited as the background to Paul’s allusion here: Numbers 14 or Numbers 16. It should be noted at the outset that neither of these passages includes Paul’s language of a “Destroyer” (ὀλοθρευτής, 1 Cor 10:10).117 Both passages, however, refer to God’s severe punishment for those who grumble against the Lord. The first possibility for the reference to these events is Numbers 14.118 In this passage, the people grumble against their leadership. In Num 14:11 the Lord interprets their complaints against Moses and Aaron (14:2) as a refusal to believe in God’s power and provision: “How long will this people despise me? And how long will they refuse to believe in me, in spite of all the signs that I have done among them?” The complaints against the Lord’s care for the Israelites in the desert precipitate God’s vow of the people’s destruction (14:12, 28–38), and his plan to establish a new nation through his servant Moses (14:12). In this passage, therefore, grumbling against the Lord’s spokespeople is tantamount to complaining against God and is equated with lack of belief in the Lord.

116

Consider also 1 Cor 10:22. The term that Paul uses in 1 Cor 10:10 is not found in the Septuagint. Variations of the Greek verb ὀλεθρεύω, however, are found. For example, ὀλεθρεύοντα Exod 12:23; ὀλεθρεύων Wis 18:25; cf. ἐξολεθρεῦσαι Ps 105:23 LXX. 118 Argued by Hays, 1 Corinthians, 165. 117

B. 1 Corinthians 10:1-13: The Legacy of Faithfulness

77

A second possibility for the allusion to grumbling in 1 Cor 10:10 is Numbers 16, the rebellion of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram.119 Moses interprets Korah’s seditious faction as a gathering “against the Lord” (16:11) and sets up a challenge to see who belongs to the Lord (16:5). God destroys Korah and those with him (16:28–33). In Josephus’s recounting of Korah’s rebellion (A.J. 4.56–60), he uses language of destruction to refer to God’s punishment of Korah (ὄλεθρος, A.J. 4.50, 61).120 In A.J. 4.16, Korah accuses Moses of wanting glory for himself and using the name of God to get it. Josephus interprets Korah’s behavior as rebellion against the Lord and not simply rebellion against the Lord’s servant (A.J. 4:14–60). The same is true for Pseudo-Philo’s retelling of this story. In Biblical Antiquities, it is God who responds immediately to Korah’s protests with a speech (L.A.B. 16.2–3), and the source of contention surrounds Korah’s disobedience to God.121 Finally, although Numbers 14 and 16 are the two main possibilities for the scriptural allusions in 1 Cor 10:10, Psalm 106 also recites the grumbling of the ancestors. This psalm recalls the events of Numbers 16:1–35 (Ps 106:16– 18) and possibly alludes to Numbers 14 with its reference to a disgruntled people who have no faith in God’s promises (106:24). The psalm portrays a people who are grumbling in their tents (106:25) and includes God’s vow to destroy them (ἐξολεθρεῦσαι, 106:23; LXX 105:23). In Ps 106 there is no doubt that the people’s ungrateful attitude is directed against the Lord, as the Israelites fashion an idol (v. 20), forget the God who saved them (v. 21), yoke themselves to Baal of Peor by eating sacrifices offered to lifeless gods (v. 28), mingle with the nations (35–36), and sacrifice to “demons” (v. 37). Many of the charges by the psalmist connect with the charges highlighted by Paul in 1 Cor 10:5–10: “falling” in the desert (10:5; Ps 106:26), the cravings of the people (10:6; Ps 106:14), engaging in idolatry (106: 19–20, 28, 35–39), testing the Lord (1 Cor 10:9; Ps 106:14), and grumbling (1 Cor 10:10; Ps 106:25; cf. 106:16–18).122 In contrast to Paul’s retelling, however, the psalmist recalls many transgressions of Israel and does not always correlate a charge to a specific form of destruction, as Paul does in verses 7–10. What is most significant about this correlation for our purposes is that the psalmist

119 LXX Number 16:6 uses the same language as Paul uses in 1 Cor 10:10 to refer to the people’s behavior: ἐγόγγυσαν in LXX Num 16:6 and γογγύζετε in 1 Cor 10:10. See Mitchell, Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation, 139; Meeks, “And Rose Up to Play,” 68. 120 Paul uses ὄλεθρος to refer to the destruction of the flesh in 1 Cor 5:5 and to sudden destruction in 1 Thess 5:3. 121 Frederick J. Murphy, Pseudo-Philo: Rewriting the Bible (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 80–81. 122 Cf. Pseudo-Philo, L.A.B. 10:7 that highlights features similar to Paul’s retelling (e.g. a cloud, the rock, bread from heaven, well of water that follows the people).

78

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

interprets all these events as an outworking of a people who have forgotten the Lord. 3. Summary Paul appeals to the ancestral transgressions as signs of the people’s unfaithfulness to the Lord. This interpretation is well established by readings within Israel’s scriptures and supported by Jewish contemporaries of Paul.123 In 10:6–11, Paul employs Israel’s scriptural traditions to demonstrate the real threat of craving evil and, ultimately, to illustrate the peril of the Corinthians’ situation. The ancestors experienced dire consequences for their actions. Likewise, the warnings in 10:6, 11–13 demonstrate that the church is living in the presence of a real threat. Paul makes analogous the ancestral actions of craving evil things and the Corinthians’ current temptation to dine in a local temple. This temptation has the power to cause one to stumble and has the ability to harm one’s brother or sister in the faith (10:12–13). Although the verb choice is different (πίπτω is used in 10:12), the idea of actions causing one to fall in 10:12 echoes 8:13: “Therefore if food causes my brother to stumble (σκανδαλίζει), I will by no means eat meat, in order that I might not cause my brother to stumble (σκανδαλίσω).” In chapter 8, there is a clear danger of how others will be influenced by the actions of the “knowledgeable.” In chapter 10 the threat is less focused on the other and much more directed toward those who think that they are strong enough to withstand temptation. Paul makes it clear that God alone is the source of strength (10:13, 22). Paul’s appeal to scripture in 1 Cor 10:6–11 demonstrates that there is much more at stake than the Corinthians’ factionalism. In 10:11, there is a reminder to the corporate body of the critical time in which they all stand – at the end of the ages (10:11). The reality that the Corinthians are offending one another is a symptom of a much greater problem: allowing their craving for “evil things” to turn them away from serving the one true God. The factions of the church are the result of their struggles to live faithfully in their environment. Fortunately, however, they can trust in God’s continued faithfulness, as Paul urges them to do in 10:13 (cf. 1:9).

123

Cf. the “Song of Moses” in Deut 32. Regarding Jewish contemporaries of Paul, Josephus, frequently interprets some of the same exodus traditions as transgressions against God (e.g., A.J. 3.296–300, 302, 309–15, 322, 4.11–60). This view of intertextual hermeneutics is influenced by Bruce Fisk, “The intertextual hermeneutics characterizing the exegetical literature of post-biblical Judaism and early Christianity is grounded in the intratextual hermeneutics of the Hebrew Bible” (Do You Not Remember?, 110, 315).

C. Our Theological Past

79

C. Our Theological Past: Serving the Faithful God of our Ancestors C. Our Theological Past

In 10:1–22, Paul introduced the Israelites as people who have been baptized and nourished by God and who have journeyed in God’s presence, that is, “under the cloud” (10:1). Yet, this relationship with God – which bears remarkable similarities to the Corinthians’ own spiritual journey – was tenuous. In 10:5, Paul says that God was not pleased with most of the ancestors, and they were overthrown in the wilderness. In verses 6–11 he makes it clear that the Israelites are the ones who transgressed. He equates their transgressions with craving evil things, or, craving things that are antithetical to God and God’s provision. In contrast to the unfaithfulness exhibited in the ancestral examples, in 10:13 Paul reiterates a point that he introduced earlier in the letter: God’s faithfulness (also in 1:9).124 Through Paul’s exodus rehearsal, the Corinthians are called to avoid the mistakes of their ancestors and are reminded of the permanence of God’s faithfulness and the severity of God’s jealousy. This exodus rehearsal illustrates a key point: the Israelites’ status as a people is bound to the identity, care, and provision of God. Likewise, God is the source of the Corinthians’ life in Christ (1:30). Through Paul’s scriptural allusions in 10:1–22, he instructs the Corinthians in order that, unlike their predecessors, they might exhibit faithfulness that is based on their common confession in a faithful God. Paul’s reminder of God’s faithfulness is couched in the larger discussion begun in 8:1 concerning consuming food that has been offered to idols, an issue that will be discussed in more detail in the coming chapter. Apparently, the Corinthians have asked for Paul’s advice in a previous letter regarding dining in the local temples.125 What is fascinating about Paul’s discussion of this dilemma, however, is how he introduces this divisive issue. At the beginning of chapter 8 Paul conveys ideas that the Corinthians may have written in their letter to justify their consumption of meat that had been sacrificed to idols (8:1,4, 8). Paul agrees with the Corinthians that there is no God, but one (verse 4). He affirms this theological stance in the Shema-like confession in 8:6, the profession of one true God and one Lord Jesus Christ (8:1– 124

Cf. 1 Clem 52:1–4; 43:6; 53:3. Confessing the Lord and being faithful to God are highlighted in 1 Clement’s treatment of Israel’s exodus. Like Paul, Clement uses scripture to instruct the church in behavior appropriate to a people who have been chosen by God. He instructs the divisive Corinthians that they serve a God who has the power to make them a people and the power to obliterate them. He reminds them that this God does not need anything, but requires faithfulness (52:1). Moreover, Clement illustrates the reality that God wants the people to confess him only (52:1) and to glorify the Lord (52:3). 125 Based on the parallel between how Paul introduces the discussion in 8:1 with how Paul introduces the matters “about which you wrote” in 7:1.

80

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

6).126 Paul is not disagreeing with the Corinthians’ theological foundations; however, he will use this common theological confession to correct their presumptions of faithfulness toward God. Any rationale that the Corinthians put forward to justify the consumption of idol food in the precincts of local temples stems from their partial knowledge of the divine (8:2; cf. 13:9, 12). Knowledge of God that does not make itself manifest in love is partial. After asserting the limitations of their knowledge of God in 8:2, the apostle reminds the Corinthians in 8:3 that any knowledge of God is due to God’s first knowing them. In 8:6, Paul credits the Corinthians’ existence to the activity of one God. Everything exists through God and for God “for whom we exist.” Also, “we” exist through Jesus Christ, the one Lord. Without this one God and one Lord, the Corinthians would be like all the others following “so-called gods in heaven or on earth.”127 Dining before any so-called god is a dangerous enterprise. Eating in a temple endangers the “weak” by encouraging them to return to former idolatrous practices (8:10–12). Furthermore, eating before other gods places all the Corinthians in a perilous position of appearing unfaithful and, thereby, invoking the Lord’s jealousy (10:22). God’s faithfulness to the Corinthians requires faithfulness in return. In the examples of 10:6–11 every transgression of the ancestors was directed toward God and each resulted in consequences that affected the larger community. Paul’s imaginative exodus rehearsal illustrates that the Corinthians serve the same God and the same Lord as their ancestors, and for this reason they need to learn from their ancestors’ transgressions. To learn from these mistakes, Paul reintroduces them to their ancestral God. The lessons of verses 6–11 instruct the Corinthians not to take God’s faithfulness for granted as they contemplate invitations to dine in the local temples and as they consider the needs of their brothers and sisters in the faith. The stark reality, exemplified by the destruction of some of the Israelites, is that God’s faithfulness demands faithfulness in return. Paul will address this reality directly to the Corinthians in verses 14–22, but before he relates the Corinthians’ new past to their present dilemma, he highlights a key theological confession: God is faithful.

126

Clement interprets the exodus narrative in a way that links faithfulness to God with being God’s people. Just as Paul introduces the larger section of 8:1–11:1 with a reminder of the Corinthians’ common confession in one true God (8:6), Clement situates this exodus illustration after a call to remember the “common ground of our hope” which is to confess God (52:1–4; cf. 43:6). Only after this appeal to their common faith does Clement mention the most famous idolatry scene of all. Some of the Israelites forgot the ways of God, and as a result God wanted to destroy all of them except Moses (53:3). 127 As suggested by 1 Cor 6:11 and 12:2.

C. Our Theological Past

81

In 10:13, Paul underscores God’s faithfulness. This reminder makes it clear that those who were overthrown in the wilderness behaved in a manner displeasing to God, although they had been baptized into the cloud, experienced God’s deliverance, and were led by God’s servant. Paul declares that God is not to blame for the destruction of some of the ancestors. In verse 13, he even acknowledges that God always provides a way out of these tempting and dangerous situations. In other words, God is faithful to help the people avoid unfaithfulness. Israel’s exodus epitomizes God’s faithfulness and jealousy. I. Illustrating God’s Unswerving Faithfulness In Israel’s exodus tradition, Paul finds a telling example for the fledgling church to learn how to be a people who belong to God. As Paul considers the dilemma of the Corinthians, he recalls the exodus as a story of a faithful God and recounts his Christ-filtered reading of this narrative to remind the Corinthians that their identity is bound to this same faithful and jealous God. Just as God has recently revealed Godself to the Corinthians, so the exodus narrative captures the Israelites’ response to the revelation of this same God. In Chapter One, we discussed the importance of the exodus as an identity marker for Israel. The exodus narrative is foundational for the identity of the Israelites, precisely because it is a story of the God who chose this people, who was concerned to preserve God’s holy name before the nations, and who continually acted in steadfast love toward faithless generations. First and foremost, the exodus is a story about God. This God has aligned his very identity among the nations with the people of Israel. The exodus narratives reveal that this God is both faithful to his people and jealous when the people stray after other gods. The only text explicitly cited by Paul in his rehearsal of Israel’s wilderness wanderings is Exodus 32:6, and this text illustrates God’s demand for loyalty on the part of the people. In this passage, the Hebrews, who have witnessed the Lord’s decisive victory over the Egyptian army and have experienced the power of his mighty hand, treat the Lord God as an impotent idol who needs to be fashioned by human hands and carried around by human subjects. When there is no sign of Moses’s return, the people beg Aaron, “Come, make gods for us, who shall go before us; as for this Moses, the man who brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we do not know what has become of him” (32:1b). After the fashioning of the golden calf, the people exclaim, “These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of

82

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

Egypt!”(32:4b).128 Aaron decides to turn their worship of the calf into a festival to the Lord (32:5). In Exodus 32, the forging of the golden calf demonstrates that the recently delivered Israelites fail to grasp the Lord’s distinctiveness from the gods of other nations. Although the Lord has invested his identity in this people, the responsibility for “the people” shifts throughout this passage.129 The Lord says to Moses in verse 7, “your people, whom you [Moses] brought up out of the land of Egypt” (italics added for emphasis). The reason for this shift comes immediately afterward, “They have cast for themselves an image of a calf, and have worshipped it and sacrificed to it, and said, ‘These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt!’” (v. 8). Philo links the calf imagery to “a god of the vanity most honored among the Egyptians” (Ebr. 95). In Exod 32:7–8, the people are blurring the lines between the gods of their captors and the God who freed them. In these two verses, the Lord’s condemnation mimics the words of the people in verses 1 and 4 that give credit for deliverance first to Moses and then to the other gods.130 In regard to idolatry, Philo quips, “For polytheism creates atheism in the souls of the foolish, and God’s honor is set at naught by those who deify the mortal” (Ebr. 110). The Lord is indeed angry with the “stiff-necked” people for forgetting what God has done for them, and, because the people have disowned the Lord and given praise and honor to false gods, the Lord wants to “consume them” (v. 10). Moses’s response to the Lord’s wrath highlights the correlation between the Israelites’ identity as a people and the revelation of God among the nations. In verse 11, Moses reminds God that these are the Lord’s people, whom the Lord brought out of the land of Egypt, and begs the Lord to consider how the destruction of this people would appear to the Egyptians: “Why should the Egyptians say, ‘It was with evil intent that he brought them out to kill them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth’?” (v. 12a).131 This same concern for how Israel looks before enemies occurs in v. 25 in an aside: “When Moses saw that the people were running wild (for Aaron had let them run wild, to the derision of their enemies).” The rather ingenious appeal by Moses to God’s reputation before the Egyptians harks back to Exod 14:4: “and the Egyptians will know that I am the

128 These words appear almost verbatim in 1 Kgs 12:28 when Jeroboam places two golden calves before the people, one at Bethel and the other in Dan, so that the people would not have to go up to Jerusalem for worship. 129 Much of the shifting in this passage could be due to the multiplicity of sources, for discussion see Durham, Exodus, 416–434. 130 See also Fretheim, Exodus, 283. 131 Consider also Deut 9:12–29.

C. Our Theological Past

83

Lord.”132 The people have sinned against the Lord by forgetting that God delivered them from the hands of their oppressors and by giving credit for God’s mighty deeds to mute idols, who lack the ability to provide or to protect. Moses reminds the Lord that the Egyptians know who delivered this people. To kill the people now in the wilderness would suggest that the Lord did not have the power to do for this people what the Lord had promised. It would bring shame to the Lord’s holy name before Israel’s enemies because these people have been chosen by the Lord. Their identity as a people is intertwined with the Lord’s identity as their God. The appeal for the Lord to act in accordance with his faithfulness and to remember his witness among the nations is a common theme in recitals of Israel’s exodus. In Numbers 14, Moses pleads with the Lord when the people refuse to trust in God’s provision and exclaim that it would be better for them to return to Egypt. The Lord threatens to disinherit the people and to strike the group with pestilence in the wilderness (14:12, 29–30; cf. 1 Cor 10:5). Moses calls as witnesses the Egyptians and the nations who all know that the Lord is among this people and exclaims, “Now if you kill this people all at one time, then the nations who have heard about you will say, ‘It is because the Lord was not able to bring this people into the land he swore to give them that he has slaughtered them in the wilderness’” (14:15–16). Moses urges that the power of the Lord be manifested by remembering his promise and by demonstrating his steadfast love (14:17–19). The people’s continued existence proves that God has been faithful to them in spite of the unfaithfulness of some. In a similar manner, the psalmist’s rehearsal of the exodus in Psalm 106 picks up this theme: “Our ancestors, when they were in Egypt, did not consider your wonderful works; they did not remember the abundance of your steadfast love, but rebelled against the Most High at the Red Sea. Yet he saved them for his name’s sake so that he might make known his mighty power (vv. 7–8).” Again the people are accused of forgetting what God has done (also vv. 13, 21–22), and again the Lord acts for the sake of his reputation as a God who dwells among his people. The psalmist praises the Lord for his steadfast love (v. 1), mighty deeds (v. 2), and the glory of his heritage (v. 5), and acknowledges that the Lord acts on behalf of the people for the sake of his name. The appeal to God’s faithfulness in the face of the people’s unfaithfulness is repeated in the prophetic literature. In the declaration of judgment recorded in Ezekiel 20:1–44, the prophet rehearses Israel’s history of unfaithfulness starting with the beginning of its history as a people and demonstrating how the sins of the ancestors are repeated in generation after generation. The 132 See also Exod 14:18; cf. 9:16: “But this is why I have let you live: to show you my power, and to make my name resound through all the earth.”

84

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

hope of this people rests only in God’s faithfulness. Six times in this discourse the prophet recalls the Lord’s faithfulness to act for the sake of his holy name and particularly to preserve his name among the nations (20:9, 14, 22, 39, 41–42, 44).133 Again and again in this text, the emphasis is placed on the Lord’s actions to preserve this people to whom God made Godself known (20:9), and generation after generation failed to keep God’s ordinances.134 Israel did nothing to prompt God’s choosing, but according to Ezekiel, God chose to make Godself known to this people and to set them apart from the nations (20:9–12). The utter dependence of Israel’s existence upon God is visible in the lament of the people in Jer 14:1–10. Suffering from a drought (Jer 14:1–6), the people cry out to God to act for his name’s sake to save them despite their numerous iniquities (14:7). Ultimately, they recognize in their desperation that their identity as a people rests in the presence and faithfulness of this God: “You, O Lord, are in the midst of us, and we are called by your name; do not forsake us!” (14:9).135 Again and again in Israel’s scriptures, God acts in mighty ways to preserve God’s people, and several times the text claims that God acts “for his name’s sake,” indicating that God is always faithful. While the story of the exodus is the story of Israel’s birth as a nation, it would not be credited as such had God not been faithful to keep his promises. Above all, Israel’s identity rests in the actions of the God who chose them to be a people. The stories of Israel are distinctive because they are stories of a God who interacts with the world differently than the gods of Israel’s neighbors, and this God requires faithfulness in return. God, who has acted faithfully toward Israel, will continue to be faithful to the church. This theme is crucial to Paul’s argument. Paul is offering the Corinthians reassurance that this God is not fickle, but has a long history of faithfulness (see 1:9). There is no reason for the Corinthians to follow in the footsteps of some of their ancestors who were overthrown in the wilderness, because this faithful God provides a way to overcome temptation (1 Cor 10:13). II. God’s Faithfulness in 1 Corinthians In 1 Corinthians, the appeal to God’s faithfulness is not unique to 10:13. Though the apostle only explicitly cites God’s faithfulness twice in this letter, once at the beginning (1:9) and again in 10:13, Paul repeatedly draws atten133

Consider also Jer 14:7, 9 where the cry to God begs for God’s actions in spite of the people’s iniquity. 134 Walther Eichrodt, Ezekiel, Old Testament Library (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1970), 265. 135 The importance of God’s name is an important theme throughout Israel’s scriptures. For example, consider also Deut 32:26–27.

C. Our Theological Past

85

tion to the work of God throughout this letter. The faithfulness of God is manifested in God’s activity through the work of the cross and through the calling of the Corinthians to be the church. From the beginning of the letter, Paul is careful to credit God’s work. In the introduction, Paul identifies himself as an apostle “called by the will of God” (1:1) and writes to the “church of God” (v. 2). He sends “peace from God” (v. 3) and gives thanks to God (v. 4) because of the “grace of God” (v. 4). It is at the end of the thanksgiving that Paul explicitly states God’s loyalty: “God is faithful, by whom you were called into the fellowship of his Son, Jesus Christ, our Lord” (v. 9). Mentioning God’s faithfulness in the introduction is not a matter to be taken lightly. In this thanksgiving, Paul manages to thank God for many of the topics about which he will criticize, correct, or instruct the Corinthians in the body of the letter. In verse 4, for instance, he reminds the believers of the grace of God that has been given to them through Christ, and in 1:18–2:5, he undercuts the Corinthians’ boasting by reminding them that their status is a gift from God.136 The thanksgiving also mentions spiritual gifts (v. 7), and Paul will later address spiritual concerns (2:6–16) and spiritual manifestations (12:1–14:40) at length. Likewise, though he commends their speech and knowledge in the thanksgiving (vv. 4–5), he will later chastise their use of speech and knowledge to divide the community (6:12–20; 8:1–13; 10:23– 11:1; 13:1–13). Furthermore, Paul includes a lengthy reference to the eschaton in this brief section: “as you wait for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ, who will sustain you until the end, guiltless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ” (v. 7b–8). Eschatology will course throughout this letter in Paul’s teaching on the cross (2:6–8), and his instructions on various issues (e.g., 3:13; 4:4–5; 7:29–31; 10:11; 15:1–58; 16:22). Given his use of the thanksgiving like a makeshift table of contents,137 the fact that Paul mentions God’s faithfulness in this section indicates that this is a key concern to be addressed in this letter. Paul’s reminder of God’s faithfulness in the context of chapter 10 implies that the Corinthians, like some of Israel, are unfaithful or are acting in a way that somehow betrays the God who has chosen them. In the context of 10:13, Paul will rehearse God’s actions towards Israel during the wilderness wanderings. As discussed above, Paul highlights the unfaithfulness of most of Israel and uses these negative examples as a warning for the Corinthians regarding dining in the local temples. The point of rehearsing Israel’s exodus story is explicitly stated in 10:11: “Now these things happened to them as an exam136

Consider also the powerful grace of God in 1 Cor 15:10. Paul Schubert, Form and Function of the Pauline Thanksgivings, Beihefte Zur Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 20 (Berlin: Verlag von Alfred Töpelmann, 1939), 24, 183–185. 137

86

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

ple, but they were written down for our instruction, upon whom the end of the ages has come.” Paul’s view of the eschaton has certainly colored his advice throughout this letter (e.g., 1:8; 3:13–15; 7:31; 11:26; 13:8–13; 15:1–58; 16:22) and adds a sense of urgency to Paul’s instructions here. If this world is passing away (7:31), then there is simply not time for the Corinthians to mosey around in their own “wilderness” temptations. They need to heed Paul’s warnings and to trust in a faithful God to provide for them (10:13). Since they are already following a faithful God, they need to flee from the worship of idols (10:14). In 10:14–22, the importance of divine faithfulness is implicit in Paul’s illustration of the table of the Lord. Those who drink the cup of the Lord and share in the Lord’s table are likened to the people of Israel who become partners in the altar’s sacrifices (10:18–23). Paul equates partaking of the cup and the bread with κοινωνία in Christ’s body (10:16). Partaking of both the Lord’s table and the “table of demons,” therefore, is a sign of unfaithfulness and threatens to provoke the Lord’s jealousy (10:22). Although God’s faithfulness is only explicitly mentioned twice in 1 Corinthians, the story of God’s faithful actions permeates this letter. In chapters 1– 4, there are almost as many references to God as in the rest of the letter combined.138 The argument of 1:18–2:5 centers upon the power of God who demonstrates wisdom through the “foolishness” of the cross. Throughout this section, the action revolves around God. Paul emphasizes that God is the one acting in a manner that runs counter to human wisdom. God made foolish the wisdom of the world (1:20). God is pleased to broadcast the good news through the scandalous cross (1:18–21), and God is the one who saves those who believe (v. 21). To preach Christ crucified is to preach the wisdom of God. In verses 27–29 Paul repeats the same subject and verb combination ἐξελέξατο ὁ θεός to highlight the divine actor who works against the grain of the world: “But God chose the foolish of the world to shame the wise, and God chose the weak of the world to shame the strong, and God chose the insignificant and the despised of the world, those who are nothing, to nullify those who are.”139 The apostle’s focus on divine activity serves his point well: the Corinthians have no basis for boasting. Their present position as the church is a result of God’s activity. Because of God’s action, these fledgling congregants enjoy life in Christ, and they have no reason to boast in anyone other than the Lord (vv. 30–31).

138

Victor Paul Furnish, The Theology of 1 Corinthians, New Testament Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1999), 28. 139 More literally v. 28b: “the things that are not in order to nullify the things that are.” Yet, the ideas present in verse 27–29 parallel Paul’s description of the Corinthian congregation in verse 26: “not many were wise,” “not many were powerful,” “not many were of noble birth.” See also, Collins, 1 Corinthians, 111; Thiselton, 1 Corinthians, 183–88.

D. Conclusions

87

This focus on God’s activity continues in chapters 2–4. In chapter 2, Paul can confidently claim to preach Christ crucified without adding any human embellishment in the telling (vv. 1–5). Although he admits to passing along to the mature a “secret and hidden wisdom of God” (vv. 6–7), he is careful to maintain that God is the one who has revealed this mystery (v. 10) and has provided the Spirit as a guide (vv. 11–13). In chapter 3, the apostle uses multiple metaphors to highlight divine action: God’s field (v. 9), God’s building (vv. 9–15), and God’s temple (vv. 16–17). As for the leaders in the church, they are merely “God’s fellow workers” (v. 9) since God himself causes the increase (v. 6). In 3:23, Paul reminds the bickering Corinthians that they are Christ’s and Christ is God’s (1 Cor 3:23). This focus continues as chapter 4 opens with Paul’s acknowledgement that he and the other leaders are merely “servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God” (4:1) whom God will commend (v. 5). Paul wraps up this section with yet another mention of God’s power: “For the kingdom of God does not consist in talk but in power” (4:20). The story of God’s faithfulness and the reality of God’s power are integral to the gospel that Paul preaches to the Corinthians. Indeed, there is no good news without God. Some of the Corinthians are taking God’s faithfulness and power lightly. Glimpses of this are seen not only in chapters 8–10 with the eating of idol food in local temples, but also in the abuses of the Lord’s table outlined in 11:17–34. Those who eat unworthily are accused of despising the church of God (11:22), and those who eat without discerning the body are eating and drinking judgment upon themselves (v. 29): “That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died” (v. 30). Although the Corinthians may know that there is only one God (8:4), they have failed to realize that it is the story of God’s faithfulness that should now define them. It is God’s calling that shapes their lives in the present (7:17–24), God’s presence that marks their body as a temple (6:12–20), God’s kingdom that transformed their existence (6:9–11), God’s allotment of gifts that enables the edification of the body (12:1–14:40), and God’s victory in which they have hope (15:1–58). Because God has indeed been faithful (10:13), Paul urges the Corinthians to live faithfully in return.

D. Conclusions D. Conclusions

It is of no small significance that 10:1–22 contains the lengthiest section of scriptural allusions in 1 Corinthians and that these allusions stem from Isra-

88

Chapter 2: A “New” Past

el’s exodus story.140 By intertwining this origin myth of the Hebrews with this Gentile audience, the apostle draws attention to the fact that the Corinthians’ current status as the church of God is in fact the work of an ancient God. Just as God delivered all the Israelites and chose them to be a people, so God has chosen the Corinthians to be the church. Paul accomplishes three rhetorical tasks in 10:1–13. First, in 10:1–5, Paul goes to great lengths to link the Corinthians to their “ancestors” (10:1) by establishing the connection through rituals that point to the same God (10:2– 4). By connecting the Corinthians to the Israelite ancestors, Paul has granted them a heritage among a people to whom the vast majority of the church did not belong. Scripture here is used creatively to connect the Corinthians to their proper faith ancestors. Yet, the heritage that this exodus retelling provides is not primarily aimed at forming the Corinthians into Israelites. Rather, its purpose is to charge the Corinthians to take seriously their new identity with this God who, in contrast to the people whom he chooses, has always acted faithfully. Second, Paul uses examples of ancestral unfaithfulness to instruct the Corinthians. After steeping the Corinthians in a “new past,” Paul reminds the Corinthians that, like Israel, their identity rests in the one true God. The transgressions of 10:6–10 reveal that the ancestors struggled to be faithful to this God. Each of the transgressions is directed against the Lord. As Paul indicates by including the destructive consequences, the unfaithfulness of the ancestors has implications for the life of the community. By positioning the Corinthians in a parallel position to the ancestors, the examples act as a warning for the Corinthians to remain faithful. Finally, in contrast to the unfaithful ancestors, Paul reiterates God’s faithfulness. The exodus story has taught generation after generation about the Lord, and Paul uses this story to teach the Corinthians about God’s faithfulness and the peril of the people’s unfaithfulness. In Israel’s exodus warnings, it is clear that this faithful God demands faithfulness in return. There is hope for the Corinthians to avoid following in their ancestors’ footsteps, however. In 10:13, Paul emphasizes God’s faithfulness to provide a way out of temptation. This assurance of divine faithfulness is consistent with Paul’s emphasis on God’s actions throughout this letter. This reminder of divine faithfulness serves as the basis for Paul’s urgent command in 10:14–22 to flee from idolatry. 140

These allusions are virtually ignored in John Paul Heil’s The Rhetorical Role of Scripture in 1 Corinthians, Studies in Biblical Literature 15 (Atlanta: SBL, 2005) whose work focuses on the explicit citations of scripture in 1 Corinthians and, thereby, studies the role of the Exodus 32 citation in 1 Cor 10:7b. Heil argues, however, that the matrix of scriptural allusions surrounding this citation enhances the urgent warning that Paul’s scriptural quotation raises in its rhetorical context (153–39).

Chapter Three

The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present: 1 Corinthians 10:1–22 Part Two In 1 Corinthians 10:1–13, Paul has adapted Israel’s exodus narrative to reflect the experiences of the Corinthians, to prompt the believers to learn from the mistakes of their ancestors, and to educate them in the faithfulness of their ancestral God. Paul uses this new past, rooted in God’s faithfulness, to reveal how the Corinthians are in an analogous situation to the Israelites. God was not pleased with most of the ancestors, due to their unfaithfulness, and they were overthrown in the wilderness (10:5). Paul urges the Corinthians to avoid the ancestors’ mistakes by trusting God to help them navigate the temptations that can result in disloyalty. Verses 14–22 comprise the crux of Paul’s instructions for the Corinthian community. In this section Paul explicitly connects the exodus retelling of verses 1–13 with his instruction on dining in the local temples (8:1–13). The unit opens with the command to flee idolatry (10:14) and ends with a reminder of God’s jealousy (10:22). After drawing the parallels with the ancestors, Paul begs the Corinthians to consider how their own communion in Christ bonds them in covenant with Christ and in fellowship with one another (10:15–17; 11:23–25). Their quandary of dining in the local temples endangers their fellowship with God and their fellowship with their brothers and sisters. In this section, Paul employs three tactics to sway the Corinthians away from unfaithfulness. First, he appeals to their practice of the eucharist (vv 16–17). Sharing in the cup of blessing and the body of Christ has real implications for their life as the “church of God.” Participation in the Lord’s table places them in communion with one another and in communion with God. According to Paul’s argument, this God has no toleration for disloyalty. Second, in light of the Corinthians’ covenant with this God, Paul warns the believers of the real danger of eating before idols through the use of two negative examples: a reminder of the Israelites’ idolatry (10:18) and an assessment of the Gentiles’ idols (10:19–20). If 8:1–13 offers any indication of how the knowledgeable view the idols of the local temples, Paul’s assessment of these idols places the Corinthians’ dilemma in threatening perspective. No longer is Paul using the language of mute and powerless idols. In 10:20–21 he reframes the Corinthians’ dilemma as an encounter with demons. Finally,

90

Chapter 3: The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present

Paul reminds the Corinthians that the Lord is jealous. He ended the previous section by asserting God’s faithfulness, and he ends this unit by warning of the Lord’s jealousy. In spite of the objections of the “knowledgeable,” Paul deals a blow to the ones who would eat in the local temples. The Corinthians, Paul warns, are not strong enough on their own to withstand the temptation.

A. 1 Corinthians 10:16–17: The Eucharistic Tie that Binds A. 1 Corinthians 10:16-17: The Eucharistic Tie that Binds

The argument of 10:14–22 relies both on the adapted story of “our ancestors” and the eucharistic experience of all the Corinthians. After beginning the section with the command to flee idolatry (10:14), Paul asks the “sensible” (φρονίµοι) folks to consider for themselves their position in Christ (10:15). This acknowledgement of the φρονίµοι could be read in multiple ways. Perhaps, some in the congregation would have read this as Paul catering to the sensibilities of those who consider themselves wise. On the other end of the spectrum, others could have heard this as a jab at the so-called knowledgeable. It is perhaps best to read verse 15 with the possibility of both interpretations since it is highly unlikely that this congregation who is divided over their knowledge (8:7) would have interpreted this line the same way. Regardless of where the Corinthians perceive one another on the knowledge spectrum, however, Paul is asking all to judge his argument in 10:15b. This statement rhetorically draws in both the knowledgeable and the weak and assumes that what is coming in the argument will appeal to common ground between them. Indeed, what comes in 10:16–17 is an appeal to the common experience of the church. Paul recalls the Corinthians’ eucharist with reference to the cup of blessing and the broken bread. Like their ancestors, they have not only feasted before God, but they have imbibed Christ (10:4). In contrast to the meals of Corinth’s environment where food was sacrificed in honor of a deity, Paul stresses that Christ himself was the sacrifice and source of life (5:7; 8:13; 10:4, 16–17; 11:23–26). Through the eucharist, the Corinthians are bound in fellowship with this Lord, and as the lessons from the ancestors have exhibited, this God tolerates allegiance to no other so-called gods or lords.1 Although Paul will correct their eucharistic practice in 11:17–34, here Paul underscores the ritual’s creation of fellowship with God through Christ and fellowship with one another in 10:16–17. The appeal to the eucharist serves at least two functions in Paul’s argument in 10:14–22. First, it recalls the experiences of the ancestors in 10:1–4. The 1

See discussion in preceding chapter.

A. 1 Corinthians 10:16-17: The Eucharistic Tie that Binds

91

language of the Corinthians’ participation in the bread and cup in verses 16– 17 parallels God’s provision of spiritual sustenance for the ancestors in verses 3–4.2 In 10:1–4, Paul declares that all the ancestors were baptized and all consumed the same food and drink. The ancestral experience reflects the worship of the Corinthians, since the ancestors are drinking from Christ the Rock (10:4). This reference to Christ foreshadows the participation in Christ’s body and blood in verse 16. Moreover, the ancestral story stresses the commonality of the experience. All experienced God’s presence (“under the cloud” 10:1). All were baptized (10:2), and all consumed spiritual food and drink (10:3–4). These experiences created a common bond. Likewise, in verse 17, Paul acknowledges of the church, “we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.” By recalling the introduction of the ancestors in 10:1–4, Paul is again reminding the Corinthians that they stand at the same crossroads as the Israelites. Like their “ancestors” they have become one body through God’s care and provision. Second, the imagery of the eucharist in 10:14–17 reveals how the Lord’s table functions for the eschatological community (those who live “at the ends of the ages” 10:11).3 Although Paul does not give a lengthy explanation for how the eucharist brings about κοινωνία, he trusts that participation in this meal fosters κοινωνία with Christ’s death (v 16), and κοινωνία with Christ’s death creates κοινωνία with one another (v 17).4 Though they are many, Paul affirms that the Corinthians have become unified through feasting on the one bread (10:17). In both sections of this letter where Paul addresses the eucharist (10:16–17 and 11:17–34), there is acknowledgement that the social prac2 Whether or not Paul is referring to the Israelites’ experience as an actual “sacrament” is an issue of great debate. See B. J. Oropeza, Paul and Apostasy: Eschatology, Perseverance, and Falling Away in the Corinthian Congregation, WUNT 115 (Tübingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 2000), 109–111; cf. P. Gardner, The Gifts of God and the Authentication of a Christian (Lanham University Press of America, 1994), 141–143. For purposes of this study, I note the parallels between the Corinthians experience of the Lord’s Table and the eucharist-like experiences of the Israelites. It is my contention that Paul portrays the ancestors as experiencing baptism and partaking of spiritual food and drink (Christ) in order to show the Corinthians that they have much in common with these ancient people of God. 3 Consider also the Aramaic phrase marana tha (1 Cor 16:22) which may indicate an early eucharistic tradition. See W. Meeks, First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul (New Haven: Yale, 2003), 159. 4 There has been much debate about the possible background for Paul’s understanding of this meal. This book asserts the influence of Israel’s Scriptures on Paul’s interpretation of the meal, although analogies with other Hellenistic meals may be present. See E. Käsemann, “The Pauline Doctrine of the Lord’s Supper,” in Essays on New Testament Themes (London: SCM, 1964), 108–135; cf. T. Söding, “Eucharistie und Mysterien: Urchristliche Herrenmalstheologie und antike Mysterienreligiosität im Spiegel von 1 Kor 10,” Bibel und Kirche 45 (1990): 140–145, who sees great parallels with mystery religions.

92

Chapter 3: The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present

tices of the congregation have not in fact reflected the eschatological community unified in Christ’s death and resurrection. In his instructions in 11:17–34 and his confidence of unity in 10:16–17, however, there are clues to how Paul believes the Lord’s Supper functions in the life of the community. The fact that Paul corrects the Corinthians’ table etiquette indicates the importance of partaking rightly. The Corinthians’ foibles in this practice offer some helpful insights. In 11:20, Paul claims that what the Corinthians are doing in the name of the Lord’s table is not the Supper of the Lord at all. The context of 11:17–34 reveals that some are eating before others arrive (11:33). Some have food and drink while others go hungry (11:21).5 Those who eat without concern for the other are accused of humiliating those who have nothing and despising the church of God (11:22). In 11:27, those who eat in an unworthy manner are guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord, and in 11:29 Paul urges the church to discern the body. This reference to the body in 11:29 is not easily reduced either to Christ’s body or to the church as the body. As C. H. Talbert maintains, “Given the context, failure to discern the body can mean only inability to perceive the Christian unity rooted in the sacrifice of Christ and actualized in the sacred meal.”6 For Paul partaking of Christ’s body fashions the individual congregants into a unified body (10:16–17). Participating in the meal without caring for one’s neighbor, therefore, does not constitute the Lord’s Supper at all (11:20), because this negligence fails to remember rightly Christ’s sacrificial giving. Partaking of the table of the Lord is an act of proclamation and remembrance. In 1 Cor 11:26, Paul says that participating in the meal in itself proclaims Jesus’ death until he comes. 7 Paul recites the words of Jesus not to remind the believers merely of Jesus’ teaching, but to engage memory through the reenactment of the night of Jesus’ death. Through the act of eucharist, the participants are called upon to “remember me.” 8 Remembering Jesus involves more than simply drinking from a cup or eating bread. Paul began the rehearsal of this tradition in 11:23 with a reminder of Jesus’ actions on the night of his death. Jesus, who would be handed over that evening, took the bread that he would equate with his own body, gave thanks to God, and willingly broke it. At the heart of the meal is the memory of this story. 5 For the possible role of how the divisions between the haves and the have-nots affects the unity of this community, see Gerd Theissen, The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity: Essays on Corinth, ed. and trans. John H. Schütz (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1982). 6 Charles H. Talbert, Reading Corinthians: A Literary and Theological Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians (New York: Crossroad, 1987), 79. 7 See Beverly Roberts Gaventa, “‘You Proclaim the Lord’s Death’: 1 Corinthians 11:26 and Paul’s Understanding of Worship,” RevExp 80 (1983): 377–388. 8 Contra J. Jeremias’s argument that the call to remembrance is for God to remember rather than a reference for believers to remember (Eucharistic Words of Jesus [London: SCM, 1966], 248).

A. 1 Corinthians 10:16-17: The Eucharistic Tie that Binds

93

Remembering the death of Jesus is linked to the expectation of Christ’s return. According to 11:26, partaking of the Lord’s table recalls Christ’s death “until he comes.” Not only are the Corinthians remembering the death of Jesus, but implicit in the act of proclamation is the hope of Christ’s coming.9 By sharing in the κοινωνία of Christ’s death, the Corinthians are enacting the gospel and proclaiming a story about the new age. The Lord’s table bears witness of Christ’s return (11:26). The believers await the revelation of the Lord Jesus (1:7–8) while the form of this world is passing away (7:31). They are a community who lives at the ends of the ages (10:11). The ritual of the eucharist, therefore, instills a new worldview. According to Geertz, for participants, rites are “enactments, materializations, realizations” of the participant’s religious perspective; therefore, rites are “not only models of what they believe, but also models for the believing of it.”10 Ritual, defined by Geertz as consecrated behavior, provides the arena in which “the world as lived and the world as imagined, fused under the agency of a single set of symbolic forms, turn out to be the same world.”11 The act of ritual is, therefore, a key component of worldview formation.12 In this act, the community gains a formative outlook that revolves around the God who called them. It recognizes a covenant relationship with this God (11:25) and acknowledges a certain responsibility to honor this God by the very nature of partaking of the Lord’s table. Partaking of the cup of demons acknowledges, on the other hand, a different worldview, one which gives other gods or idols glory and honor (10:19–20). According to Geertz, Such religious symbols, dramatized in rituals or related in myths, are felt somehow to sum up, for those for whom they are resonant, what is known about the way the world is, the quality of the emotional life it supports, and the way one ought to behave while in it. Sacred symbols thus relate an ontology and a cosmology to an aesthetics and a morality: their peculiar power comes from their presumed ability to identify fact with value at the most fundamental level, to give to what is otherwise merely actual, a comprehensive nor13 mative import.

9

Related to the hope of Christ’s coming is also the judgment of Christ (3:13–15). See C. F. D. Moule, “The Judgment Theme in the Sacraments,” in The Background of the New Testament and Its Eschatology: In Honour of C. H. Dodd, ed. W. D. Davies and D. Daube (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1956), 464–81. 10 Clifford Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures (New York: Basic Books, 1973), 114. 11 Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures, 112. 12 Thiselton, 1 Corinthians, 879, rightly argues that remembering involves more than knowledge recall: “‘To remember’ God (cf. Deut 8:18; Judg 8:34; Ps 22:7) is to engage in worship, trust, and obedience, just as ‘to forget’ God is to turn one’s back on him. Failure to remember is not absent-mindedness but unfaithfulness to the covenant and obedience.” 13 Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures, 127.

94

Chapter 3: The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present

For Paul the story of the eucharist instills a whole worldview bearing witness to how God operates in the cosmos and how those who have been called by God should view God and one another. The eucharist is a dramatization of a specific myth of God’s actions in creation. A clue for what this myth looks like comes in Paul’s word choice in 11:23. Hays notes that παραδίδωµι is often translated as “betrayed,” but Paul shows no sign of knowing or passing on the tradition of Judas’s betrayal. Instead, as Hays observes, Paul uses the term with reference to God’s actions in handing over Jesus to death (Rom 4:25) or giving up Jesus for us all (Rom 8:32). 14 If the same sense is applied to Paul’s use of the verb in 1 Cor 11:23, then Jesus’ death echoes LXX Isa 53:6 (“and the Lord gave him up for our sins”) and 12b (“and he bore the sins of many, and on account of their iniquities he was handed over”).15 Thus, the use of παραδίδωµι not only harks back to a tradition of obedience, but it also demonstrates that God is the one orchestrating these events.16 The word of the cross reveals for Paul the nature of God’s dealings with the world (1:18–2:5).17 The rehearsal of this story of Jesus shapes not only what the church believes (15:1–11), but also the present experience of this church (1:26–31). This story of the cross reminds the believers that “you are Christ’s; and Christ is God’s” (2:23). As Judith Lieu remarks, “The relationship between who we are and the past we tell is a reciprocal one and is rarely static.”18 If the Corinthians are truly memorializing Jesus’ actions on the night that he was handed over then they would recognize that their actions need to reflect this story.19 The rite reminds the participants of God’s actions and power and calls them to live in a manner worthy of the gospel. Since the ritual enacts a worldview of a self-sacrificing God who chooses to honor those whom the world rejects, then the only way to enact the ritual rightly is to allow one’s worldview to be transformed and for that transformation to be manifested in one’s behavior toward God and toward one another. For Paul, the Spirit-guided transformation of the Corinthians into God’s eschatological community is a key component of participation at the Lord’s 14

Richard B. Hays, 1 Corinthians (Interpretation; Louisville: John Knox, 1997), 198. Hays, 1 Corinthians, 198. 16 See Beverly Roberts Gaventa, Our Mother Saint Paul (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2007), 113–23. 17 Paul connects God’s power with Jesus’ death and resurrection, Rom 4:24; 8:11, 31– 39; 1 Cor 15:3–11, 26–28; 2 Cor 4:7–15; Gal 1:1–5; 1 Thess 1:10; cf. Col 2:12. 18 Judith Lieu, Christian Identity in the Jewish and Greco-Roman World (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 62. 19 See also Meeks, First Urban Christians, 158: “The repeated injunction, ‘Do this as my memorial’ (not found in the version of Mark and Matthew), shows that in the Pauline and even pre-Pauline tradition the celebration is understood as a cultic commemoration of Jesus.” 15

A. 1 Corinthians 10:16-17: The Eucharistic Tie that Binds

95

table. Paul can tell the Corinthians that their meal is not the Lord’s table (11:20) because there is no evidence that the experience has evoked transformation. Bell notes that the performance of a ritual does not merely result in an inner change of the individual, but “it primarily acts to restructure bodies in the very doing of the acts themselves.”20 Of course, for Paul the restructuring is God’s work (3:1–23). The ritual of the Lord’s table is an outward manifestation of what God has done to create this new people. Hays would call this restructuring a “conversion of the imagination.”21 According to Margaret MacDonald, “Unlike the detached observer, the participant experiences a simultaneous transformation and ordering of his or her sense of reality.”22 By feeding on the broken bread the Corinthians are imbibing Jesus, and imbibing Jesus should result in acting like Jesus. As Bell asserts, “ritualization sees the evocation of a consensus on values, symbols, and behavior that is the end of ritualization.” 23 As members of this body of Christ, they are called to be “holy ones” (1:2). Remembering is linked to behavior, shaping not only the practices required to perform the ritual itself, but much more, the life pattern of the ritual’s subject, who is called to be like Jesus. Being members of Christ’s body makes Jesus’ actions paradigmatic for the behavior of the community. At the heart of remembrance are the repetitive words, “Do this in remembrance of me” (11:24–25). Eucharist that fails to transform action cannot rightly be called the Lord’s table. Remembering Christ’s death has already been mentioned as a key factor in how the Corinthians are to treat one another. In 8:11, Paul reminds the knowledgeable that their enlightened behavior might destroy the brother or sister for whom Christ died.24 In 10:16, Paul makes clear that the Corinthians have come to share κοινωνία in Christ’s death, through Christ’s broken body and Christ’s spilt blood.25 Regarding the believers’ unity in Christ’s death, Raymond Pickett observes, “If Christ’s death 20 Catherine Bell, Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), 100. 21 Richard B. Hays, The Conversion of the Imagination (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), esp. 1–24. 22 Margaret Y. MacDonald, The Pauline Churches: A Socio-historical Study of Institutionalization in the Pauline and Deutero-Pauline Writings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), 62–63. 23 Bell, Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice, 110. 24 So also, Raymond Pickett, The Cross in Corinth: The Social Significance of the Death of Jesus, JSNTSup 143 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1997), 117. 25 Cf. 2:1–5; 15:1–11, where Paul also emphasizes the importance of Christ’s death in message that Paul proclaimed to the Corinthians. Paul not only reminds them of the message he preached, in 15:1–2 he claims that they all have believed this message of Christ crucified. Paul’s proclaims Christ crucified “that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of humankind but in the power of God” (2:5).

96

Chapter 3: The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present

is the ground of the believer’s [sic] mutual responsibility to one another, then what is symbolized by that death also defines the nature of one’s obligation to the other members of the community.”26 Jesus, who surely has more knowledge of God than any of the Corinthians, died even for the “weak” (8:10–12). His self-sacrificial love for the other is modeled in Paul’s own example to be all things to all people for the sake of the gospel (9:19–23). Thus, at the end of this larger unit, Paul urges the believers to imitate him as he imitates Christ (11:1). Since the eucharist recalls self-sacrifice for the love of others, failing to reenact the memory of Jesus as a corporate body is already a sign that the Corinthians have a memory problem. The Corinthians have certainly not demonstrated the type of obedience and self-sacrifice exhibited by Christ. Unlike Jesus who was handed over for the sins of others, the Corinthians are far more concerned to prove themselves knowledgeable than they are to consider the needs of their neighbors. According to Paul, they must learn to consider “the brother for whom Christ died” (8:11). By sinning against a brother, the “knowledgeable” one is unaware that he or she is sinning against Christ (8:12). Paul is insistent, however, that they are the body of Christ (12:27). There is no community apart from God, who has chosen to dwell among them (3:16–17; 6:17, 19; 2 Cor 6:16–18). Being the church of God entails learning to behave in a way that glorifies God, and one cannot glorify God by destroying the brother or sister for whom Christ died. In the eucharistic imagery of 1 Cor 10:16–17, Paul will refer to the church as the one bread and will call them to behave as a unified body. Paul can both say that they already are this body and that they need to conduct themselves in a way befitting the body. The Corinthians, like the Israelites, have already experienced baptism by one Spirit and have been made to drink of one Spirit (12:13). By the Spirit, God has formed them into one body (10:17; 12:12–13) and granted them a new identity as God’s church (1:2; 10:32). Enacting the eucharist memorializes God’s actions and fosters a new community among diverse individuals. According to Bell, ritualization sees only its end, “the goal of a new person. It does not see how it produces that person—how it projects an environment that, reembodied, produces a renuanced person freshly armed with schemes of strategic reclassification.”27 For Paul it is the Spirit’s work that transforms the way an individual thinks (2:6–16; Rom. 12:1–2), and the Lord’s table is evidence of the Spirit’s work to forge a new community. The eucharist is a rite that both bears witness to the eschaton and serves as a tangible reminder of God’s calling in this age (“until he comes” 11:26). The eucharist testifies to the eschatological community that is defined not by their differences, but by their status in Christ 26 27

Pickett, The Cross in Corinth, 117. Bell, Ritual Theory, 110.

A. 1 Corinthians 10:16-17: The Eucharistic Tie that Binds

97

(12:4–6, 27). In 1 Cor 12:12–13, Paul repeats the idea of 10:17. Here, though, all have become one in baptism: “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body – Jews or Greeks, slaves or free – and all were made to drink of one Spirit” (12:12–13). In the midst of the Corinthians’ bickering, their failures to practice the eucharist rightly, and their insensitivity to the needs of one another, Paul can appeal to a unified body, brought into κοινωνία by God through the commemoration of Christ’s death and through the expectation of Christ’s return— because God is faithful. For Paul, God is the one working to produce the new community (3:1–23). In 5:7, Paul can tell the Corinthians to “be as you really are.” Through the cross, the Corinthians have been given a new identity. In 6:11, Paul reminds the believers that they used to be identified by their vices. They were the immoral, idolaters, robbers, drunkards, and thieves. Now, however, they are “washed,” “sanctified,” and “justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Spirit of our God” (6:11). They are something new. They are a “new lump” of dough, pure of any corrupting yeast (5:6–7). They have been transformed and are now “members of Christ” (6:15), and they need to behave in such a manner. Summary The power of eucharistic memory in 10:16–17 is demonstrated in transformed behavior that nurtures unity in a community established by God’s actions in Christ. Remembering Jesus’ death incorporates the participants into a shared past, in which they did not physically participate, a shared future in the hope of his return, and a shared present of being Christ’s body in the world. The act of remembering shapes the identity and character of the community. The Corinthians who are boasting in their own knowledge and neglecting the conscience of the weak are not demonstrating transformation. By eating in the presence of idols, they are in fact repudiating their allegiance to a new worldview in which the one true God is sovereign. In response, Paul evokes the eucharist, a ritual signifying the way God acts in the world, to challenge the Corinthians to consider one another and to remind them that they are in κοινωνία with a faithful God. Although Paul will admonish the Corinthians concerning their factious dining practices (11:17–34), his appeal to the eucharist in 10:16–17 reminds the believers that they have all been adopted into a story of a God who has acted through the wisdom of the cross. Just as the story of the exodus – a story of divine deliverance and covenant – is passed on to each generation through the rituals of Passover, the eucharist performs the story of the Corinthians’ salvation and covenant with Christ. By partaking the eucharist, the Corinthians are affirming a new world order, where God rules through the epitome of weakness – the cross (1:18–2:5). This new worldview realizes that

98

Chapter 3: The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present

all the vestiges of this old age are flawed, including gods made by human hands. To honor any other god, therefore, is to forsake the power of the one Sovereign Lord. The Corinthians’ present experience should be shaped through the cosmological and theological lenses provided by the foundational narrative enacted through the eucharist.

B. 1 Corinthians 10:18–20: The Bond of Fellowship in Sacrifice B. 1 Corinthians 10:18-20: The Bond of Fellowship

By eating before an idol’s altar, the Corinthians are forming two important bonds: a bond with what that idol represents and a bond with the other participants in worship. In 1 Corinthians, the act of eating and drinking is intrinsically linked to fellowship. In 10:1–4, all Israel ate and drank supernatural food and drink. In 5:6–8, Paul invites the Corinthians to feast on sincerity and truth because Christ the pascha has been slain. Likewise, in 11:17–34, Paul chastises the Corinthians for not eating and drinking while discerning the body. This concern for κοινωνία also undergirds Paul’s argument in 10:14–22. According to Paul’s imagery in 10:14–22, the stakes of eating before an idol are rather high (cf. 15:32–33). For instance, in 10:7, some of the Israelites ate and drank in the presence of an idol and were destroyed in the wilderness. Likewise, eating food that has been sacrificed to idols might cause some in the Corinthian community to be destroyed by being misled by the actions of the “knowledgeable” (8:1–13). Eating without discerning the needs of one’s neighbor is dangerous. In 11:17–34, the table etiquette of some of the Corinthians resulted in Paul’s accusation that they have despised the church of God and humiliated those who have nothing. Furthermore, those who ate without discerning the body were in danger of becoming ill or even of dying (11:30). Eating with one another and in the presence of the divine matters. In 10:14–22, the apostle warns the Corinthians not to partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons (10:21). Paul employs two examples to undergird his warning. In 10:18, Paul first recalls the example of the Israelites, already cited in 10:7, to show that eating before an idol is not a matter to be taken lightly. Those guilty of idolatry were among those who were overthrown in the wilderness (10:5). Then, in 10:19–20, he provides a fresh perspective for viewing the Corinthians’ dilemma of eating food that has been sacrificed to an idol in the local temple. Here Paul reconfigures the temple’s dinner hosts as “demons” rather than merely idols. I. 1 Corinthians 10:18: The Israelites as Partners in the Altar In his effort to persuade the Corinthians to avoid idolatry, Paul again appeals directly to the story of the Israelites. If Paul emphasized the church’s solidarity with the ancestors as God’s people in 10:1–4, here he is distancing the

B. 1 Corinthians 10:18-20: The Bond of Fellowship

99

Corinthians from τὸν Ἰσραὴλ κατὰ σάρκα. In 10:1, he evoked Israel’s story, but did not refer to Israel by name. Instead, he referred to the people of God as “our ancestors.” In 10:1–4, Paul highlighted all that the Corinthians and these ancestors had in common and emphasized how the unity and existence of each group revolves around God’s activity.28 The acts of baptism and eucharist are indicative of the people’s communion with God. In 10:18, however, Paul distances the Corinthian congregation from these ancient ancestors. No longer are they called ancestors. Now Paul recalls the Israelites by name and adds a peculiar qualifier, “according to the flesh.” The effect of this restrictive phrase is to emphasize the difference between the majority of the church and their “ancestors.” Appropriately, this distinction also comes just at the point where Paul is again warning the Corinthians not to follow in the footsteps of these ancestors (10:6, 11). Here, the title “Israel” and the addition of the prepositional phrase “according to the flesh” separate the predominantly Gentile audience of this letter from this other group of people and their sacrifices. The label “Israel according to the flesh” likely refers to those who are Israelites by birth (cf. 9:3–4).29 This example of Israel should cause the Corinthians to pause. After he has rhetorically shown a bond between the ancestors and the Corinthians in 10:1–13, here in the climax of his instructions to the church, Paul’s way of referring to the idolatrous sacrifice of the Israelites effectively distances this first-century people from the Israelites who participated in idolatry. The example in 10:18 is an appeal back to 10:7 and a warning for the Corinthians to learn from Israel’s mistakes (10:11). In 10:18, the reference to Israel’s sacrifices serves as a negative example. Although the language of sacrifice is commonly equated with Israel’s sacrifices to God (especially Lev 7:5–8 or Deut 18:1–5),30 Paul uses the term θυσιαστήριον to refer to the sacrifice of the altar (1 Cor 9:13) or the altar itself

28

See Chapter Two. This is by no means an uncontested issue. As Fee notes, “The very usage [of κατὰ σάρκα] which is otherwise unnecessary, seems to imply that there is another Israel κατὰ πνεῦµα” (1 Corinthians, 470). Furthermore, “Israel according to the flesh” could refer to contemporary Jews. In the context of Paul’s argument, however, there is an immediate reference to Exodus 32 in the previous paragraph. This suggests that the Exodus 32 episode of the golden calf informs Paul’s instructions. 30 Hugo Gressman argues that the word θυσιαστήριον refers to the divine name “Η ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ ΤΩΝ ΔΑΙΜΟΝΙΩΝ,” ZNW 20 (1921): 224–230; Cf. Rom 11:3; 1 Cor 9:13 where the term refers to the altar or items on the altar. For those who take the term to refer to sacrifices to the God of Israel see Fee, 1 Corinthians, 470; Collins, 1 Corinthians, 380; Fitzmyer, 1 Corinthians, 392; Barrett, 1 Corinthians, 325; Horsley, 1 Corinthians, 141; Wendell L. Willis, Idol Meat at Corinth: The Pauline Argument in 1 Corinthians 8 and 10, SBLDS 68 (Chico: Scholars Press, 1985), 187. 29

100

Chapter 3: The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present

(Rom 11:3 – where it is a citation).31 Within the contexts of each of these uses Paul is referring to Israel’s sacrifices to God; however, there is nothing inherent in the word itself that connotes a sacrifice to the God of Israel. In the context of 1 Corinthians 10, the most immediate reference to Israel’s sacrifice is the imagery of idolatry in 10:7. Thus, the act of sacrifice here would allude back to the imagery of the golden calf.32 By eating the sacrifices to the golden calf, the Israelites have given credit to an idol for their divine deliverance (Exod 32:4). Even if some of the Israelites believed they were honoring the divine by fashioning an idol (Exod 32:4–5), their actions echo the religious experience of the culture from which they were rescued and fail to acknowledge the distinctiveness of this Lord who called them to be his people.33 In short, some of the Israelites, although being in communion with God (10:1–4), failed to take seriously their κοινωνία with God. After raising the importance of κοινωνία with Christ and with one another, Paul is reminding the Corinthians of the danger of taking κοινωνία with the divine lightly. Since they have much in common with these faith ancestors through baptism and eucharist, Paul’s comparison with the Israelites invites them to ask whether they are also like the Israelites when they dine at the local temples. This issue is central in verses 19–20. II. 1 Corinthians 10:19–20: The Sacrifices at the Corinthian Temples In 1 Cor 10:19–20, Paul reframes the Corinthians’ dilemma to expose a threatening scenario: sharing the table of demons. He opens verse 19 with an echo of the slogan in 8:4 (“an idol has no real existence”): “What am I saying? That food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything?”34 Paul denies the power of idols both in chapter 8 and in 10:19–20. Yet, in 31

See also the discussion in Willis, Idol Meat at Corinth, 185–187. So also R. B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale, 1989), 93; similarly Gardner (The Gifts of God, 155–185), who reads 10:18 in connection with vv. 1–13, but also uses 1–13 as a way to equate κατὰ σάρκα with the sin of Israel (165). Paul uses this prepositional phrase in Rom 4:1 and 9:3–4, however, to refer to those who are Jewish by birth. Abraham serves as a forefather in Rom 4:1. To Paul’s kinsfolk “according to the flesh,” whom he calls “Israelites” in Rom 9:4, are given the covenants and promises, and from these people Christ came “according to the flesh.” 33 Consider Deut 32. 34 Although there is much debate on how to interpret 8:1–13, the majority of scholarship agrees that 8:4 represents a viewpoint heralded by the Corinthians. For excellent treatments of the issues in light of ancient rhetorical techniques, see Joop Smit, “The Rhetorical Disposition of First Corinthians 8:7–9:29,” CBQ 59 (1997): 476–492; John Fotopoulos, “Arguments Concerning Food Offered to Idols: Corinthian Quotations and Pauline Refutations in a Rhetorical Partitio (1 Corinthians 8:1–9),” CBQ 67 (2005): 611– 631. 32

B. 1 Corinthians 10:18-20: The Bond of Fellowship

101

10:20, he links the seemingly innocuous presence of idols to the menacing threat of demons. Do the idols then represent something that does exist? Do they fall into the category of “many so–called gods and many lords” that Paul mentions in 8:5? To understand Paul’s reference to “demons” here we must consider the relationship of 10:14–22 to the larger argument begun in 8:1–13 regarding the consumption of food that has been offered to idols. 1. Idol Food and the Table of Demons: Looking Back at 8:1–13 The Corinthians have written to Paul regarding whether or not it was acceptable to consume food that had been sacrificed in honor of another deity.35 Paul devotes a large section of this letter to address this issue, 8:1–11:1. First Corinthians 8:1–13 presents the issue of food sacrificed to idols and eaten in the precincts of a local temple (8:10), while 10:25–26 introduces a related topic of sacrificial food that is sold in the macellum and eaten in a private setting (10:27–29).36 In between these two discussions of idol food are two sections that illustrate Paul’s instruction: an appeal to Paul’s apostolic practice (9:1–27) and the example of the ancestors (10:1–22). In 9:1–27, Paul raises his apostolic practice as a paradigm to emulate of one who prioritizes his rights according to the mission of the gospel. Paul willingly debases himself and negates his own rights by making himself a slave to all (9:19) so that in the end he might not be disqualified (ἀδόκιµος, 9:27) for the eschatological prize.37 The second illustration, 10:1–22, reveals a negative example of some of the ancestors who were unfaithful to God. Most of these ancestors have been revealed as ἀδόκιµος, by succumbing to the temptations in the wilderness. In 10:13 Paul promises the Corinthians that God is faithful to provide a way out of temptation and, with this promise, provides assurance that the Corinthians need not be disqualified like some of their ancestors. According to 1 Cor 8:1–13 some of the believers are engaging in a practice that has the combined disadvantage of dividing the church of God and coming perilously close to idolatry. Some are eating food that has been offered to idols within the precincts of local temples (8:10), and this behavior is a “stumbling block to the weak” (8:9). There are two formidable problems that 35 1 Cor 7:1 offers the pattern for introducing topics about which the Corinthians wrote, and 1 Cor 8:1 begins with the same pattern, “now concerning . . . .” 36 See for instance John Fotopolous, Food Offered to Idols in Roman Corinth: A Social-Rhetorical Reconsideration of 1 Corinthians 8:1–11:1 (Tübingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 2003). Regarding the distinction between the two settings (temple vs. private meals) see Bruce W. Winter, “In Public and in Private: Early Christians and Religious Pluralism,” in One God, One Lord, ed. A. D. Clarke and B. W. Winter (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992), 125–48. 37 So also Fee, 1 Corinthians, 440; David Horrell, “Theological Principle or Christological Praxis?” JSNT 67 (1997): 83–114, 95.

102

Chapter 3: The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present

Paul cites regarding this practice. First, dining in the temple has caused some of weaker conscience to follow suit (8:10). Although the knowledgeable may cite their confession of one God and one Lord (8:6) and their lack of belief in the existence of idols as rationale for viewing their behavior as innocuous (8:4), not all share this knowledge (8:7). The weak assess the dilemma differently (8:7). For them, dining in the local temples becomes a matter of unfaithfulness. Eating before an idol risks placing Christ among the many gods or lords of their former life (8:7; cf. 12:2). Should these weak members follow the example of the knowledgeable, this behavior might lead to a relapse to their former practices and, thus, Paul says, to their destruction (8:11). Second, by leading the weak astray, the knowledgeable are actually sinning against the weaker brother or sister. Significantly, Paul frames this betrayal as sinning against Christ (8:12). Thus, Paul inextricably links activities harming members of the body to activities betraying Christ himself, a point to which we will return. Pinpointing how 10:1–22 fits within the flow of Paul’s argument begun in 8:1–13 is a contentious matter. Many interpreters point to the supposed inconsistency of Paul’s advice between 8:1–13 and 10:1–22.38 As we have noted, 10:14 explicitly forbids the practice of idolatry, and 10:18–21 warns against sharing the table of a demon. Judging from 1 Corinthians 10, it would seem that believers who are dining in the local temples should desist. In chapter 8, though, Paul affirms the Corinthians’ liberty to eat the idol food (8:8–9) with the immediate restriction being the consideration of one’s brother or sister (8:13).39 To add to the confusion, Paul’s advice in 10:23–11:1, regarding the consumption of food in a non–believer’s home, whole– heartedly blesses eating idol food. The only restriction given by Paul revolves around the consideration of a weaker brother or sister who may be present. Exactly what is the connection between chapter ten’s prohibition of εἰδωλολατρία and chapter eight’s ambiguous advice concerning εἰδωλοθύτον? Does the consumption of εἰδωλοθύτον inherently constitute idolatry? Since the focus of this study is the interpretation of Paul’s use of exodus traditions, 38 Indeed this seeming inconsistency with between 8:1–13 and 10:1–22 has spawned numerous partition theories. See J. Weiss, Der erste Korintherbrief, xxxix–xliii; W. Schmithals, “Die Korintherbriefe als Briefsammlung,” ZNW 64 (1973): 263–88; idem, Gnosticism in Corinth: An Investigation of the Letters to the Corinthians, trans. John E. Steely (Nashville: Abingdon, 1971), 87–113; J. Héring, The First Epistle of Saint Paul to the Corinthians, trans. A. W. Heathcote and P. J. Allcock (London: Epworth, 1962); W. Schenk, “Der 1. Korintherbrief als Briefsammlung,” ZNW 60 (1969): 219–43; J. C. Hurd, The Origin of 1 Corinthians (Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1983), 43–47. 39 Regarding the translation of ἐξουσία as “liberty,” see the excellent survey of this term in Willis, Idol Meat in Corinth, 98–104. Willis states, “Whether as used by the Corinthians was a term taken from popular usage or one derived from their founder-apostle, for them it has one specific content, ‘the authority to eat any kind of food’” (103).

B. 1 Corinthians 10:18-20: The Bond of Fellowship

103

the concern here is to show how 10:1–22 fits within its larger setting and not to resolve all of the difficulties of the passage. In 10:20–21 Paul is still writing concerning the problem discussed in 8:1–13, and in these two verses he offers a different perspective on the Corinthians’ potential dining experiences. Among those who believe that 8:1–11:1 is a coherent unit, there have been, roughly speaking, two broad ways of reconciling 10:14–22 with 8:1– 13. The first way is exemplified by Gordon Fee. It should be noted that Fee himself has made great strides in reconciling these texts over against the “traditional” view that the whole passage addressed the same issue, namely, the question of marketplace food.40 By reading 8:10 and 10:1–22 in parallel, Fee concludes that the central dilemma in 8:1–10:22 is the consumption of sacrificial food within the setting of a cultic meal in the local temples. 41 Because of this reading, he interprets εἰδωλοθύτον as referring only to sacrificial food eaten in a cultic setting.42 Similarly, Ben Witherington defines εἰδωλοθύτον as “meat sacrificed to and eaten in the presence of an idol, or in the temple precincts.”43 By creating this narrow definition, there can be a distinction between 8:1–10:22, concerning idol food consumed in local temples, and 10:23–11:1 which concerns sacrificial food sold in the markets.44 According to Fee, 10:14–22 strictly prohibits the practice of dining in local temples, but 10:23–29 encourages the “weak to take a broader view.”45 The major problem with Fee’s distinction, as well articulated by Bruce Fisk, is that in 8:8–10, Paul implies that there are certain situations in which idol food may be eaten in a temple setting without being sinful. What Paul identifies as sinful is the destruction of the weak through the influence of one’s actions. This is a sin, not only against the body of Christ, but against Christ himself (8:11–12). As Fisk argues, if members of the group were

40

Fee, 1 Corinthians, 358. Fee, 1 Corinthians, 359. See also Ben Witherington, “Not So Idle Thoughts About EIDOLOTHUTON,” TynBul 44.2 (1993): 237–254. 42 So also Witherington, “Not So Idle Thoughts About EIDOLOTHUTON,” 237–254. 43 Ben Witherington, “Not So Idle Thoughts About EIDOLOTHUTON,” 237. For our purposes it is significant that Witherington defines εἰδωλοθύτον based on setting. The limitation of this term to apply to meat only has been well challenged by J. Fotopoulos, “The Rhetorical Situation, Arrangement, and Argumentation of 1 Corinthians 8:1–13: Insights into Paul’s Instructions on Idol-Food in Greco-Roman Context,” Greek Orthodox Theological Review 47 (2002): 165–198, esp. 174–175. 44 See Fee, 1 Corinthians, 360–361. 45 Fee, 1 Corinthians, 359. 41

104

Chapter 3: The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present

actually engaged in idolatry, then it seems that Paul would have explicitly addressed idolatry sooner.46 If the first way of relating these passages overemphasized 10:14–22 by equating the warnings of idolatry with the dilemma of 8:1–13, the second way of reconciling the two texts is guilty of underemphasizing 10:14–22. For instance, John Brunt claims that the section is part of the larger argument of 8:1–11:1, but it is “somewhat parenthetical” since Paul includes it merely to clarify his own position on idolatry.47 David Horrell claims that 10:1–22 “does not contain the dominant focus of Paul’s ethical instruction,”48 and Anthony Thiselton says that 10:1–22 is a digression in the argument that might apply to a few.49 While Fisk resists the temptation to refer to this section as a digression, he does admit that 10:14–22 would only concern a handful of people, those who are explicitly engaging in idol worship. Similarly, although Derek Newton follows Fee by interpreting 8:1–13 through the lens of 10:14–22, he believes that 10:20–22 represents “an absolute behavioral boundary line . . . which believers must not transgress.”50 The boundary, according to Newton, is for the believers themselves to make a sacrificial offering. To echo Fisk’s criticism of Fee’s argument, if some were actually making sacrifices surely Paul would have addressed this from the beginning. Nowhere in the text does it indicate that any in the church are actually making sacrifices in honor of an idol. Contra the under-emphasis on the argument of 10:1–22 to apply to the whole community, it seems preposterous indeed that Paul would spend so much time developing his argument in 10:1–22, if only a small number needed to be reprimanded. Yet, even if a small number were actually dining in the banquet halls of the local temple, their deeds are capable of influencing all in the congregation, as Paul argues in 8:10.51 It makes more sense to see 46

Bruce Fisk, “Eating Meat Offered to Idols: Corinthians Behavior and Pauline Response in 1 Corinthians 8–10 (A Response to Gordon Fee,” Trinity Journal 10 (1989): 49– 70, esp. 59–61. 47 John Brunt, “Rejected, Ignore, or Misunderstood? The Fate of Paul’s Approach to the Problem of Food Offered to Idols in Early Christianity,” NTS 31(1985): 113–124, esp.114. 48 Horrell, “Theological Principle of Christological Praxis?” 101. 49 Thiselton, 1 Corinthians, 718. 50 Derek Newton, “Food Offered to Idols in 1 Corinthians 8–10,” TynBul 49.1 (1998): 182. 51 Dale Martin understands the weak as the “weaker” members of the economic body who are more impressionable due to their lack of leisure and education, The Corinthian Body (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995), 31–32. According to Martin, “those of higher status may need to yield in some matter to those of lower status and accommodate their demands to the needs of the ‘weaker’ for the sake of concord and the good of the whole” (42). The actions of the higher status members of the body, therefore, have an enormous impact on the body as a whole. This understanding is corroborated by A.D. Clarke’s reading of 1 Cor 5–6. Clarke argues that members of higher status are in posi-

B. 1 Corinthians 10:18-20: The Bond of Fellowship

105

10:1–22 as an integral feature of Paul’s advice to the community at large. If 8:4–6 does in fact preserve the slogans of the knowledgeable, then there is no evidence in 8:1–13 that any of the “knowledgeable” are consciously honoring idols nor do they consider their participation in such feasts as an act of worship. If it were the case that they themselves are sacrificing to the other gods, then it is unthinkable that Paul would grant any concession of liberty to the knowledgeable (8:9, 13). Why then is it acceptable in certain circumstances to consume εἰδωλοθύτον and in other circumstances it is not? First, it should be noted that for those who lack knowledge, whom are also called the “weak,” it is never acceptable to consume this food.52 For this group, consumption alone – either in a temple or in a home – constitutes idolatry. Second, Paul makes allowances for the knowledgeable, based upon their correct theological principles (8:4, 6).53 The creedal formula of 8:6 preserves an adapted form of the Shema.54 Willis points out, “The context makes it difficult to believe that Paul initiated reference to the creed.”55 It is certainly possible that the knowledgeable who are denying the existence of idols are also affirming one God and one Lord. It is also feasible, however, that Paul has marshaled this creed-like statement at the beginning of his extensive argument to pattern one’s life in faithfulness to God. If the knowledgeable had been saying this to justify their behavior, Paul is making significant use of this affirmation of faith to caution them tions of authority over those who are less wealthy. The man’s actions in chapter 5 could have been tolerated by the community simply because Corinthian society is not used to members of lower social classes reprimanding the wealthy, nor do the lower class members have the resources to challenge their wealthy benefactors, Secular and Christian Leadership in Corinth: A Socio-Historical and Exegetical Study of 1 Corinthians 1–6 (Leiden: Brill, 1993), 73–88; see also J. Chow, “Patronage in Roman Corinth,” in Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society, ed. R. A. Horsley (Harrisburg: Trinity Press, 1997), 104–125. 52 Oropeza, Paul and Apostasy, 63. Oropeza points out that 4 Maccabees and the Didache seem concerned with the eating of idol meat itself rather than the place where it is eaten. Rather than seeing that distinction in Paul, Oropeza argues that the distinction surrounds who is eating. 53 There is much debate about whether 8:5 could preserve statements contained in the Corinthians letter to Paul. Willis points out that the verse is related syntactically to verse 6 (Idol Meat in Corinth, 85). Commentators such as Barrett (1 Corinthians, 192) and Conzelmann (1 Corinthians, 143), and Hays (1 Corinthians, 139) see Paul’s voice in this verse, even if Paul might be rewording what he reads in the Corinthians’ letter. 54 Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, 142; Some argue that this is a pre-Pauline tradition. See R. A. Horsley, “The Background of the Confessional Formula in 1 Cor 8:6,” ZNW 69 (1978): 130–135. Oropeza observes that this adapted version of the Shema reflects the larger Deuteronomic tradition against idolatry to which Paul alludes in 10:18–20 (Paul and Apostasy, 57). 55 Willis, Idol Meat in Corinth, 85.

106

Chapter 3: The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present

against infidelity to one God and one Lord. With regard to eating idol food, Paul says that the food itself neither commends one to God nor condemns one before God (8:8). The setting of the meal, however, is critical. Eating this sacrificial food in a home is perfectly acceptable, unless a weaker member is present (10:23–11:1). As Fee’s treatment of this unit makes obvious, it is the scene of the local temple that is the most contentious. On the heels of the theological principle stated in 8:6, Paul implies in 8:9 that there may be certain scenarios in which they could participate in meals at a temple that would not be considered idolatrous. Are there situations in which eating in the local temple would not cause the participants to be unfaithful to the one God and one Lord? What are the possible settings for 8:1–13 in which believers might find themselves at the table of an idol? Newton observes, “ . . . meals not only held ‘religious’ significance, but simultaneously were considered to act as markers of socio-economic class divisions, as opportunities to converse and build friendships, and as means of fulfilling socio-political obligations.”56 Fotopolous’s survey of archaeological evidence indicates that the Asclepion is the most likely setting for these gatherings since it had dining rooms that were functioning in the first century.57 At the Asclepion, Corinthians of higher social status hosted gatherings to honor birthdays, weddings, government appointments, religious holidays, miracles, and healings.58 According to Fotopoulos, at each of these occasions the food eaten would have first been dedicated to Asclepius.59 This dedication was simply part of cultic culture. The knowledgeable believers, who may have been accustomed to these events, may not have regarded such behavior as dangerous in any way, since they placed no stock in the power of idols (8:4). Attending banquets in the temple precincts may not have been the only sphere in which the church was exposed to food dedicated to idols. In light of the reality that religious imagery and experiences infiltrated every facet of Corinthian life, it is entirely possible that food dedicated to the imperial cult may also have prompted the larger discussion. Theissen notes that the food dilemmas of 8:1–10:22 could possibly stem from cultic festivals where food 56

Newton, “Food Offered to Idols in 1 Corinthians 8–10,” 181. Fotopoulos, Food Offered to Idols, 63–69. Fotopoulos is willing to grant the possibility that the temples of Isis and Serapis are also probable venues, if adequate archaeological evidence could be found for dining rooms in use in the first century. He argues against Gooch that the temple of Dionysius would be a plausible locale since the consumption of food offered to the god was typically reserved for initiates, and since the dining rooms do not appear to have been in use in the first century (Fotopoulos, Food Offered to Idols, 69– 70, 127–28). 58 Fotopoulos, “The Rhetorical Situation, Arrangement, and Argumentation of 1 Corinthians 8:1–13,” 177; idem, Food Offered to Idols, 63–70. 59 Fotopoulos, Food Offered to Idols, 63–64. 57

B. 1 Corinthians 10:18-20: The Bond of Fellowship

107

was distributed to the general populace and paid for by the state or by wealthy benefactors.60 Festivals such as these may have been associated with the biennial arrival of the Isthmian Games whose popularity and prestige were exploited by the imperial cult.61 The Corinthian poor could be faced with the dilemma of eating meat at such grand religious festivities or extraordinary civic events, since all citizens were often invited to feast at these celebrations. According to Ramsay McMullen, “For most people, meat was a thing never eaten nor wine to surfeit never drunk save as some religious setting permitted.”62 Although the “knowledgeable” may have been presented with eating sacrificial food more often and, thus, may have become accustomed to the rituals honoring other gods, Thiessen demonstrates that eating sacrificial food was not solely a dilemma for those of high enough social status to be invited to dine at the local temple banquet halls. On the contrary, eating food sacrificed to idols was a dilemma that affected every citizen in the community at one time or another. Would all these gatherings – whether a civic event or a celebration in a dining hall – have religious significance? Fisk claims that Paul is not concerned about where the meal occurs or what one eats, but the nature of the meal itself: “Many temple activities were indeed theologically and morally ‘neutral,’ but others were blatantly idolatrous.”63 On the other hand, though, Fotopoulos argues that every meal was accompanied by highly religious ritual in spite of some meals celebrating non-religious events.64 In a similar vein, Newton observes that the meal and the sacrifice constituted an inseparable unity.65 Although the gathering itself might be a social occasion, every meal had some religious significance. Given the nature of the social occasion, Fisk may be right that some meals had more religious significance than others. Nonetheless, claiming that any of the meals could be considered “theologically or morally ‘neutral’” seems to be a stretch. Perhaps there might have been some scenarios that would have been more offensive to the weak than others. For all these scenarios, however, Paul raises the moral and theological concerns of sinning against a brother or sister and sinning against Christ (8:11– 12).

60

Theissen, Social Setting, 127–28. See Bruce W. Winter, Seek the Welfare of the City: Christians as Benefactors and Citizens (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994), 173–74; O. Broneer, “The Apostle Paul and the Isthmian Games,” Biblical Archaeologist 25 (1962): 1–31; idem, “Paul and the Pagan cults at Isthmia,” Harvard Theological Review 64 (1971): 169–84. 62 Ramsay McMullen, Paganism in the Roman Empire (New Haven: Yale, 1981), 40. 63 Fisk, “Eating Meat Offered to Idols,” 63. 64 Fotopolous, “The Rhetorical Situation, Arrangement, and Argumentation of 1 Corinthians 8:1–13,” 177. 65 Newton, “Food Offered to Idols in 1 Corinthians 8–10,” 180. 61

108

Chapter 3: The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present

The boundaries between social events and religious observances are blurred. As Newton observes, “Because of the complex, multi-faceted nature of images, sacrifices and communal meals, any attempt to define and demarcate the actual boundaries of ‘idolatrous worship’ was fraught with difficulty.”66 What is clearly idolatry to some is not considered idolatrous by others.67 Paul counters this dilemma by reminding the Corinthians that they belong to one God and one Lord. Both the weak and the knowledgeable are appealing to God. Both sides can appeal to their belief in one God to define idolatry. Instead of disputing over God, Paul marshals powerful examples of what it means to be “known by God” (8:3). First, he gives his own example as one who follows a Christ-like strategy of being all things to all people for the sake of the gospel so that he might qualify for the prize (9:27). Then, in contrast to this example, he shows how most in a whole group of ancestors failed to qualify (10:1–13). When all of 10:1–22 is taken as an integral part of the larger argument of 8:1–11:1, it provides an example for the Corinthians of the Israelite ancestors, another group who were chosen by God and who were presented with similar dilemmas. For this ancient group, sinning against God had radical social implications, since some were destroyed in the wilderness (10:6–11). The situation of dining in the local temple places the believer on a slippery slope toward idolatry. Even if Fisk were right that some meals had more religious overtones than others, the knowledgeable are engaged in activities that could be, and apparently already have been, construed as participation in idol worship. By placing themselves in a position that can be construed as idolatrous, those believers, who have the knowledge to affirm the lordship of one God, threaten the distinctive testimony of the church that there is only one God and one Lord. Even given the slim chance that some of the events taking place at the local temple might be innocuous, Paul urges the Corinthians to follow his own example and to seek the good of the brother or sister.68 Paul must re66

Newton, “Food Offered to Idols in 1 Corinthians 8–10,” 181. See also idem, Deity and Diet: The Dilemma of Sacrificial Food at Corinth (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1998), 22–23. 67 See Richard Liong-Seng Phua, Idolatry and Authority: A Study of 1 Corinthians 8:1– 11:1 in the Light of the Jewish Diaspora, Library of New Testament Studies/JSNTSup 299 (London: T & T Clark, 2005). Phua attempts to understand the views of idolatry present within the Corinthians congregation by studying the differing attitudes toward idolatry by Diaspora Jews of the period. Phua reads 9:1–27 as Paul’s key text to show his own authority in defining idolatry for the congregation. A critical issue in relating Phua’s study to 1 Corinthians 8–10 is how much the views of Diaspora Judaism infiltrate this congregation. 68 E. Coye Still takes this argument a degree further by saying, “Paul’s aims are to persuade the Corinthians to adopt complete non-use of their authentic right to consume food offered to idols and to prohibit participation in idolatrous temple meals. The practical result of Paul’s argument is the compliant Corinthian knower will abstain from all temple

B. 1 Corinthians 10:18-20: The Bond of Fellowship

109

frame their thinking in 10:1–22 to show them the necessity of seeing their world and their situation differently so that they will act in accordance with their new life in Christ. 2. The Table of the Lord and the Table of Demons: 1 Corinthians 10:19–20 Paul’s language in 10:19–20 is jarring. To change the Corinthians’ behavior, Paul attempts to reframe the Corinthian’s dilemma in terms of a threatening scenario: dining before demons. In the Pauline corpus, only here does he employ δαιµόνιον, which is used four times in 10:20–21.69 Although Paul denies that idols have any real power, he maintains that there are real forces present in this age.70 In 2:6, he acknowledges the rulers of this age, and in 15:26 he personifies Death as an enemy (see also 15:54–56). While affirming the Corinthians’ belief in the non-existence of idols in 10:19, Paul reminds the Corinthians that these idols are representative of other supernatural forces.71 It is possible that, for the Corinthians, the language of demons would call to mind offerings presented at banquets. Rituals honoring the divine accompanied meals at the local temple.72 Guests were accustomed to pouring out a libation to the god of the temple, for instance.73 In a study of the GrecoRoman meal practices, P. Coutsoumpos demonstrates that dinners had designated ways of venerating the gods.74 In this setting, the term δαιµόνιον was meals and from all food identified as having been offered to idols” (“Paul’s Aims Regarding ΕΙΔΩΛΟΘΥΤΑ: A New Proposal for Interpreting 1 Corinthians 8:1–11:1,” NovT 44 (2002): 332–343, 334). If Paul’s “aims” were to make a strict prohibition, then he could have said as much plainly. The nuances of Paul’s arguments reflect the need for the Corinthians’ thinking about God and one another to be reframed. Paul is using principles of glorifying God and seeking the benefit of the neighbor (10:23–11:1) as guides for the Corinthians’ behavior. 69 By contrast, forms of the terms δαιµόνιον and δαίµων appear frequently in the Synoptic Gospels, see e.g. Matt 7:22; 9:33, 34; 10:8; Mark 1:34, 39; 3:15, 22; 6:13; 7:26; 9:38; Luke 9:49; 11:14, 15, 18, 19. 70 As he also acknowledges in Rom 8:38–39. 71 So also Fee, 1 Corinthians, 471. 72 See Fotopoulos, Food Offered to Idols, 72–76, 97–101,158–176; P. Coutsoumpos, Community, Conflict, and the Eucharist in Roman Corinth (Lanham: The University Press of America, 2006), 12–31; Contra Wendell Willis, Idol Meat in Corinth, 63, who argues that the “pagan cult meals were not sacramental . . . nor communal (an occasion of intimate relationship between the worshipper and the god).” Willis believes that the meals were purely social in nature. 73 See Coutsoumpos, Community, Conflict, and the Eucharist in Roman Corinth, 8–18, esp.11; Fotopoulos, Food Offered to Idols, 176–178; Peter Lampe, “The Eucharist: Identifying with Christ on the Cross,” Interpretation 48 (1994): 36–49. 74 Coutsoumpos, Community, Conflict, and the Eucharist in Roman Corinth, 7–24, esp. 11.

110

Chapter 3: The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present

equated with a divine power and was often used with reference to an inferior divine being.75 For instance, the Greek δεῖπνον included a libation to the ἀγαθόν δαιµόνιον,76 and the symposium commenced with libations to the Olympian gods, the heroes, and Zeus Soter, after an initial hymn to Dionysos.77 In Paul’s argument, however, any offering before an idol binds those present to the god who is honored.78 In 10:18, he argues, “Consider Israel according to the flesh, are not those eating the sacrifices partners of the altar?” Partaking in such a ceremony has real power for the participants. It is not that the idol has any authority (10:19–20), but that the participants form a bond of fellowship either with the divine or with a demon. Participants in the Lord’s table are dining before the Lord. Richard Bell argues that the phrase “table of the Lord” refers to the whole eucharist, including the cup and the bread, and that Jesus is viewed as truly present at the table as host and Lord.79 The participants in this table fellowship and in its accompanying rites are transformed in the process. For participants at a cultic feast to honor idols, repeated exposure to this ritual would have lasting effects by affirming the worthiness of these so-called gods to receive praise for what only the one, true God has the power to provide (8:6). According to Dale Martin, the mention of demons reveals Paul’s underlying concern for purity. Martin cites numerous views of disease and illness and argues that for some in the ancient world the presence of disease is affiliated with the work of “daimons.” 80 For the weak of the congregation, who do not have the power of “gnosis,” the fear of pollution by these evil spirits is real. Martin’s work astutely links Paul’s purity concerns throughout this letter with the concern to prevent any form of body pollution. Martin notes, 75

Xenophon, Mem. 1.1.2; Plato, Apol. 24c and Symp. 202e; Homer, Od. 3.27 The “Good Genius” Aristophanes, Vesp. 525; Nicostratus, Comicus 20, Athenaeus, Deipn. 15.675b, Pausanius, Descr. 9.39.5. This toast was given in honor of Nero in OGIS 666.3 (Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae, ed. W. Dittenberger, Leipzig 1903–5). See also Coutsompos, 11; Fotopoulos, Food Offered to Idols, 258. 77 Coutsompos, Community, Conflict, and the Eucharist in Roman Corinth, 11. 78 Contra J. Y. Campbell, “KOINONIA and its Cognates in the New Testament,” JBL 51 (1932): 352–380. Campbell argues that κοινωνία refers to fellowship with people, not fellowship with the divine. See Exod 24:4–11; Lev 2:3, 10, Deut 12:4–28; Willis, Idol Meat at Corinth, 187; Garland, 1 Corinthians, 481. Garland rightly criticizes the language of risk, exemplified in B.J. Oropeza’s interpretation: “By having fellowship with idolaters in an idolatrous setting, there is always the risk of being united with them in their worship and practices” (“Laying to Rest the Midrash: Paul’s Message on Meat Sacrificed to Idols in Light of the Deuteronomic Tradition,” Bib 79 [1998], 57–68, 66). 79 Richard Bell, Deliver Us from Evil, WUNT 216 (Tübingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 2007), 276. 80 For a discussion of varying views on the power and presence of demons as they relate to body purity, see Martin, The Corinthian Body, 153–62, 163–97. 76

B. 1 Corinthians 10:18-20: The Bond of Fellowship

111

“The Strong operate by a logic of balance, with its relative lack of concern about pollution or invasion; Paul operates by a logic of invasion, with its anxieties about purity and firm boundaries.”81 By placing Paul’s primary concern with body boundaries, Martin is able to interpret Paul’s teaching on idol food by saying, “eating food sacrificed to idols presents a problem for Paul because it may lead, first, to pollution of the person who eats without proper ‘knowledge’ and, ultimately, to the joining in commensality of Christ and daimons, an unthinkable possibility for Paul.” 82 Paul is certainly concerned for the purity of the congregation (1 Cor 5:6–8), and Martin’s work illuminates the views of demons that some in the congregation may share. Paul’s concern for purity, however, is not divorced from his desire to see the church reflect the God whom it serves. Although the weak may be motivated by fear of demons, Paul seems to be operating less with a fear of demonic pollution and more with a fear of God’s jealousy. If some in the church show honor to demons by participating in rituals that acknowledge other powers, then they are in real peril of allowing the ritual to corrupt their view of God and the cosmos. After all, Paul does not prohibit the consumption of idol meat when the believers are not in danger of influencing the “weak” (1 Cor 10:25). Those who place no stock in the notion that idols can invade the body are in greater danger of leading others astray than they are of being polluted by daimons, as Martin makes clear. However, those who participate in such ceremonies – even with the proper knowledge – are in real danger of having their worldview transformed by the rituals associated with sacrificing food to idols.83 Being present in cultic settings where food is sacrificed and libations are poured exposes the believers to a ceremony that instills the belief in the presence and power of other gods. Their participation in such a ritual bears witness against the central affirmation that there is no God but one. Paul’s equation of idols with demons finds precedent in scripture. In Ps 105:36–38 LXX, the psalmist uses the imagery of idols (γλυπτοί) and demons (δαιµόνια) interchangeably. Likewise, in Deut 32:17, the Song of Moses accuses the people of sacrificing to demons rather than to God.84 While the idols may not have any power in and of themselves, Paul is mindful that they are representative of other powers. The dilemma is not simply about dining 81

Martin, The Corinthian Body, 163. Martin, The Corinthian Body, 175. 83 Newton (Deity and Diet, 364) argues that κοινωνία is created by actually sacrificing to other gods as the nations do (citing 10:20). The problem with this view is that 10:14–22 then becomes a boundary that might not affect many in the congregation. If the Corinthians were sacrificing to the other idols, it seems that Paul would have mentioned this in 8:1–13. 84 See also Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul, 93. 82

112

Chapter 3: The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present

before mute statues, but about forming κοινωνία. Paul says, “I do not want you to become partners with demons” (10:20). All the Corinthians have already become partners with God through Christ and partners with one another as members of Christ’s body. By participating in a meal where idols are honored, they run the risk of κοινωνία with demons. Paul’s reasoning here echoes the argument in 6:12–20. Just as members of the body would not think of corrupting Christ’s body with a prostitute, so members should not consider placing Christ’s body in κοινωνία with demons.85 In 6:17, Paul reminds the believers that the one who is united to the Lord is one spirit with him. The body is God’s temple (3:16–17; 6:19), and they all, as members of the one body, belong to God (3:23; 6:19–20). Therefore, Paul’s concern here cannot be only for the purity of the congregation as a body, but it is for the congregation’s distinctiveness as the church of God. In his argument that group solidarity entails firm boundaries, Meeks contends, “Paul uses the symbolism of the Supper ritual not only to enhance the internal coherence, unity, and equality of the Christian group, but also to protect its boundaries vis-à-vis other kinds of cultic association.”86 If the congregation fails to be faithful to the God who has chosen them, then they, like some of their Israelite ancestors, risk the church’s association with any other religious group who honors multiple gods. At the risk of provoking God’s jealousy, Paul urges the Corinthians to flee from all appearance of idolatry. The Corinthians’ partial understanding of the theological principles of 8:4 and 6 is simply insufficient. What really matters regarding this dilemma is not what the Corinthians think that they know about idols. What truly matters is not their knowledge at all (1 Cor 13:8–9). Rather, Paul reminds them that all who love God, as they all claim to do, are known by God (8:3). God’s actions have fashioned them into a community. The “knowledgeable” fail to see that the theological principles of 8:4 and 6 are not divorced from a social reality. By sinning against their brother or sister they sin against God. As Brunt astutely observes, Paul’s advice concerning the Corinthians’ dining dilemma transcends the food issue.87 Brunt claims that the central core of Paul’s ethical thought is love or “to act responsibly in love toward the other person.”88 Horrell takes a similar stance by arguing that at the core of Pauline ethics is Christ’s self-giving love.89 85 A key argument also used by Martin for the purity of the community, The Corinthian Body, 163, 185–189. 86 Meeks, First Urban Christians, 160. 87 Brunt, “Rejected, Ignored, or Misunderstood?,” 115. 88 Brunt, “Rejected, Ignored, or Misunderstood?,” 115. 89 Horrell sharply states, “In essence Paul argues here that Christian ethics are founded not upon theological principles but upon a Christological praxis” (“Theological Principle

B. 1 Corinthians 10:18-20: The Bond of Fellowship

113

It is certainly correct to see self-giving love as a central piece to Paul’s instruction here. In 10:24 Paul gives a general rule of thumb to seek the good of one’s neighbor. To stop with the love of neighbor, however, is to miss the superior commandment of Paul’s admonition. Paul begins his argument with a reminder of God’s role: “If one loves God, this one is known by him” (8:3). Furthermore, in the conclusion of the argument in 10:31, Paul wraps up this whole discussion with a reminder to do all for the glory of God. The σύµφορον of many is God’s salvation (10:33).90 Paul’s own example, elaborated in 9:1–27, demonstrates what life looks like as one who prioritizes the gospel above all else (10:33–11:1). 91 At the end of his argument in 10:33– 11:1, the apostle again reminds the audience that his own behavior, as one who seeks not his own advantage but the advantage of many, is modeled after that of Christ. Thus at the heart of Paul’s argument are the two greatest commandments: to love the Lord and to love one’s neighbor as oneself.92 For Paul these principles are interwoven and have been perfectly manifested in Christ’s example (11:1). Loving one’s neighbor is a means of glorifying God. To lead one’s neighbor toward idolatry, however, betrays the God who called this congregation into being. Summary In sum, 10:18–20 is a critical feature of Paul’s argument in 8:1–11:1. Reading 10:1–22 in concert with 8:1–13 does not mean that Paul considered every dining situation in which the knowledgeable participated as idolatrous. Seeing 10:1–22 as part of the argument, however, demonstrates that, as a people bound to a jealous God, the Corinthians must be wary of any situation in which either they draw others into idolatrous behavior or they place themselves in the perilous position of participating again and again in activities or Christological Praxis?,” 105). This boundary between christological praxis and theological principle is not as defined in this letter as Horrell’s argument claims. Rather than seeing Christ’s actions over against the theological principles of 8:4, 6, Christ’s actions serve as a filter through which Paul understands God’s work (1:18–2:16; cf. 10:4, 9). Horrell is correct that Christ is the paradigm for those who claim allegiance to one God and one Lord (11:1), but the theological principle of 8:6 demands faithfulness. In many respects 10:1–22 illustrates what is at stake in the confession of one God and one Lord. 90 Regarding the importance of the term σύµφορον see Mitchell, Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation, 142–149. 91 Regarding the fit of 9:1–27 into Paul’s rhetorical strategy see Mitchell, Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation, 130–38. Regarding Paul as example see Willis, Idol Meat in Corinth, 108–110; Horrell, “Theological Principle or Christological Praxis?,” 91–95. 92 D. F. Watson makes a similar argument that Paul is moving from specific examples of the Corinthian dilemma to the more general principles of 10:31–11:1 (“1 Corinthians 10:23–11:1 in the Light of Greco-Roman Rhetoric: The Role of Rhetorical Questions,” JBL 108 (1989): 301–318, especially 313, 318).

114

Chapter 3: The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present

that numb them to the real threat that lies before them. By repeated exposure to rituals of the local temple, the Corinthians risk participating in activities that transform their worldview and desensitize them to the danger of idolatry. Treating idols casually fails to acknowledge the other powers that the idols represent. By bringing demons into the discussion, Paul has raised the stakes of the Corinthian dilemma. Eating idol food in the local temples places the Corinthians in the same precarious position as the ancient Israelites.93 The parallel with the unfaithfulness of the Israelites (10:6–11) reveals that transgressions against the Lord radically affect the body as a whole. Paul does not want the Corinthians to become idolaters, nor to allow their behavior to influence others to return to their former idolatrous practices. For the knowledgeable to put themselves in a situation that bears the appearance of idolatry they are placing others at risk of destruction (8:11). Although they claim to love God, their actions fail to bring God glory. In light of 10:1–22, this type of self-seeking behavior brings the Corinthians in danger of God’s judgment and threatens their continued existence as the distinctive church of God (cf. 10:5).

C. 1 Corinthians 10:21–22: Kοινωνία with a Jealous God C. 1 Corinthians 10:21-22: Κοινωνία with a Jealous God

By establishing the similarities between the Israelites and their descendants in Christ, Paul situates the existence of Israel and the church in the activity of the same God. One of the first lessons learned about this God is God’s provision and care. The Lord baptized all Israel through the sea passage and provided spiritual sustenance for all of them. Then, when most of them acted in a displeasing manner by craving evil, they were overthrown in the desert (10:5). The transgressions listed in verses 6–11 relay the ancestors’ disloyalty to the Lord. Paul does not want the Corinthians to make the same mistake by neglecting to be faithful to the God to whom they owe their existence.94 In verses 14–22, he admonishes the Corinthians to avoid unfaithfulness. After reminding the believers of their κοινωνία in Christ (10:16–17) and appealing once again to the failure of most of Israel (10:19), Paul ends this section with pointed questions: “Are we provoking the Lord to jealousy?95 Are we 93

Contra Newton’s assertion that 10:18–20 refers to activities that the Corinthians have not yet engaged in: “In 1 Cor. 10.14–22, however, Paul moves a stage further and records what other people (‘pagans’) are doing now, namely making actual sacrificial offerings” (Deity and Diet, 24, emphasis original). 94 The affirmation of the one true God can be seen throughout Paul’s letters: 1 Thess 1:9; Gal 3:20; Rom 3:30; 1 Cor 8:4,6; cf. Eph 4:6. 95 This translation of παραζηλοῦµεν attempts to convey the real threat of the Corinthians’ position in the present time. The verb παραζηλόω is not common for Paul. Cf. Rom 10:19 where Deut 32:21 is cited.

C. 1 Corinthians 10:21-22: Κοινωνία with a Jealous God

115

stronger than he?” (10:22). The scriptural witness to the Lord’s faithfulness and jealousy motivates these direct challenges to the audience. The force of the questions in verse 22 shakes the believers out of a false security in their own limited knowledge (8:1–7). Although Paul has affirmed some of the arguments of the knowledgeable (8:4, 6), here he is urging the congregation to question their practices: “Are we provoking the Lord to jealousy?” If any are still disposed to defend their behavior, then Paul’s next question prompts the hearer to agree with Paul on at least one point. The second half of this verse expects a negative response from the audience (µὴ ἰσχυρότεροι αὐτοῦ ἐσµεν; “Are we stronger than he?”). Paul’s argument encourages the Corinthians to consider that, like Israel, not only are they subject to the wrath of God’s jealousy, but that by their actions they may indeed be provoking it. The questions assume that the Corinthians do not wish to provoke the Lord’s jealousy. Indeed, if 8:4 and 8:6 preserve slogans cited by the knowledgeable, then there is evidence to suggest that these believers have not considered any of their actions as worthy of inciting God’s wrath. Paul creates a dichotomy between these two intersecting worlds in which the Corinthians live: a world that acknowledges the presence of other gods and shows them honor and a world in which a jealous God reigns supreme. The questions in 10:22 should shock the believers into awareness of their perilous situation as participants in a world that honors demons. As discussed in the previous section, whatever is being sacrificed in the local temples is certainly not being sacrificed to the God of Israel (10:20). The Corinthians are in an analogous situation to those who were overthrown in the wilderness (10:5). They are beneficiaries of God’s grace and recipients of God’s salvation (6:11). They have first been chosen by God and have been recipients of God’s loving-kindness. Because God’s Spirit dwells within them (3:16–17; 6:19), they have been made new (5:7) and are enabled to live a life that is worthy of the gospel. As those in κοινωνία with the Lord (10:16–17; 11:23–25), they must be faithful to glorify God (10:32). The recourse for their dilemma has already been commanded by Paul in verse 14, “flee idolatry.” A number of sacred stories could have informed Paul’s concern to flee idolatry. Indeed, the theme of God’s jealousy runs throughout Israel’s Scriptures, and it usually appears in conjunction with the condemnation of Israel’s unfaithfulness. 96 Paul has already alluded to the golden calf episode in 1 Cor

96

For example, see Exod 20:5; 34:14; Deut 5:9; 1 Kgs 14:22; Nah 1:2; Josh 24:19–20; Ps 78:58–64; Zeph 1:18; cf. Ps. 106:29 “thus they provoked him to anger with their deeds” and Ezek 8:3 “an idol of jealousy.” Regarding the powerless idols, see Hab 2:18–20; Is 41:29; Jer 10:2–5; Ps 115:4–8. See also Brian Rosner, “‘No Other Gods’: The Jealousy of God and Religious Pluralism,” in One God, One Lord: Christianity in a World of Religious

116

Chapter 3: The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present

10:7, and each of the transgressions in 10:8–10 evokes God’s demand for Israel’s fidelity. In 10:18–20 Israel’s idolatrous sacrifice is paralleled with the nations who offer sacrifices to demons. Israel’s scriptures portray a faithful God who expects faithfulness in return. While this general theme of faithfulness drives Paul’s argument, the language that Paul uses in 10:22 is reminiscent of the Song of Moses in Deuteronomy 32.97 To be clear, Paul does not explicitly cite Deuteronomy 32 in 1 Cor 10:22, but the language used here finds parallel in Moses’ Song. Furthermore, the use of Deuteronomy 32 elsewhere by the apostle reveals that this text makes a significant contribution to Paul’s understanding of God’s relationship with God’s people. In Rom 10:19, for instance, Paul cites Deut 32:21 as an integral feature of Paul’s argument: “I will make you jealous of those who are not a nation; with a foolish nation I will make you angry.” These words of Israel’s jealousy echo in Rom 11:11 and 14. For J. R. Wagner the influence of Deuteronomy 32 on Paul’s arguments in Romans 9–11 goes beyond the citation in 10:19. Wagner argues that Paul finds in Moses’ Song a story of Israel’s idolatrous rebellion that foretells what will happen to Israel in the future, and Paul interprets this proclamation of future events as unfolding in his own day.98 In reference to the influence of the Song in Romans 11, Wagner writes, “Thus, as his argument moves on to a new stage in Romans 11, Paul’s thought continues to be shaped at a deep level by the grand story Pluralism, 2nd ed., ed. A. D. Clarke and B. W. Winter (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992), 158– 159. 97 This connection with Deuteronomy 32 is made by many interpreters. See Guy Waters, The End of Deuteronomy in the Epistles of Paul, WUNT 221 (Tübingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 2006), 131–147; Brian S. Rosner, “Deuteronomy in 1 and 2 Corinthians,” in Deuteronomy in the New Testament: The New Testament and the Scriptures of Israel, Library of New Testament Studies 358, ed. M. J. J. Menken and S. Moyise (London: T & T Clark, 2008), 118–135; A.T. Hanson, Studies in Paul’s Technique and Theology (London: SPCK, 1974), 115, 167; W. M. Meeks, “‘And Rose Up to Play’: Midrash and Paraenesis in 1 Corinthians 10:1–22,” JSNT 16 (1982): 72; Barrett, 1 Corinthians, 236; Thiselton, 1 Corinthians, 775; Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul, 93; Horsley, 1 Corinthians, 141; Fitzmyer, 1 Corinthians, 393; Garland, 1 Corinthians, 480. Texts other than Deut 32:17 may influence 1 Cor 10:20; see C. K. Barrett, 1 Corinthians, 236–237. The main contender is Bar 4:7, and it appears that Deut 32 has influenced the imagery there. For a discussion see Waters, The End of Deuteronomy, 132–135. 98 J. Ross Wagner, Heralds of the Good News: Isaiah and Paul in Concert in the Letter to the Romans (Boston: Brill, 2003): 187–217, especially 192–93. Cf. Roy E. Ciampa, “Deuteronomy in Galatians and Romans,” in Deuteronomy in the New Testament, ed. Maarten J. J. Menken and Steve Moyise (London: T & T Clark, 2007), 99–117, especially 105: “In his use of Deuteronomy in Romans Paul seems to focus on the goodness and holiness of the Law and Israel’s contrasting dullness and unresponsiveness to it, and on the explanatory power of the Song of Moses for understanding the role of Paul’s ministry and its intended outcomes among both Jews and Gentiles.”

C. 1 Corinthians 10:21-22: Κοινωνία with a Jealous God

117

he finds in Deuteronomy 32 of God’s unshakeable fidelity to Israel.” Indeed, God’s faithfulness and Israel’s unfaithfulness reverberate throughout Deuteronomy 32. In Rom 11:22, the Lord’s kindness and severity prompt Paul to warn the Romans to remain in God’s kindness. While it cannot be proven that Paul is evoking Deuteronomy 32 in 1 Cor 10:18–22, there are some striking features of this letter’s argument that find a home in Moses’ Song. At the very least, the evidence in Romans indicates that Deuteronomy 32 informs Paul’s perceptions about a faithful God who, having called the Corinthians and made them new in Christ, requires faithfulness in return.99 The insistence on God’s faithfulness and jealousy in Deuteronomy 32 is analogous to Paul’s emphasis on faithfulness in 1 Cor 10:1–22. For example, the language of Deut 32:16–18 reframes the Israelites’ worship in terms of sacrificing to demons rather than to God. “They made him [God] jealous with strange gods, with abhorrent things they provoked him. They sacrificed to demons, not to God, to deities they had never known, to new ones recently arrived, whom your ancestors had not feared. You were unmindful of the Rock that bore you; you forgot the God who gave you birth.” As noted above, this reframing finds parallel in 10:20 where Paul equates idols with demons. Furthermore, Paul’s concern for the Lord’s jealousy brings to mind the words of the Lord in Moses’ Song: “They made me jealous with what is no god, provoked me with their idols” (Deut 32:21). These cutting words come after the praise of God’s fidelity (32:4; cf. 1 Cor 10:13) and the comparison of God to a rock (32:4, 15, 30–31; cf. 1 Cor 10:4). The Lord provided honey from the rock and oil from the flinty rock (Deut 32:13; cf. 1 Cor 10:4). The song recalls God’s provision for Israel in a desert land and divine guidance of Jacob when “there was no foreign god with him” (Deut 32:12b). God alone could be credited with the people’s survival, and God is bitterly angry at the unfaithfulness of this generation (32:20). Following the concern for jealousy is a reminder of God’s strength. Paul’s second question in 10:22 has baffled many interpreters (“are we stronger than he?”). Some take the reference to strength as an ironic allusion to those who are “strong” in Corinth.100 The problem with this interpretation is that Paul only refers to the “weak” in 1 Corinthians 8:1–11:1.101 While he does refer 99

Wagner, Heralds of the Good News, 226. Thiselton argues, “The last clause is solemn, but it adds a touch of irony if ‘the strong’ (οἱ ἰσχυρότεροι) so press their self-confidence as to imply that they are stronger (ἰσχυρότεροι) than God” (1 Corinthians, 779). See also R. St. John Parry, The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians (London: Epworth, 1962), 97; Barrett, 1 Corinthians, 238; Cf. Conzelmann (1 Corinthians, 174) who argues that the “strong” is indicative of the Corinthian attitude in general (4:10); P. Coutsoumpos, Community, Conflict, and the Eucharist in Roman Corinth, 86–87. 101 The reference to the strong in 1 Cor 4:10 comes at a different stage in Paul’s argument. In chapter 4, the dichotomy is between Paul and his coworkers as the “weak” and all 100

118

Chapter 3: The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present

to the “strong” in Romans 15, the contrast in 1 Corinthians is with those who think they have gnosis. Given Paul’s word choice to describe this “knowledgeable” group, it is unlikely that the reference to God’s strength in 10:22 is an underlying jab at the Corinthians’ knowledge. Rather, there are other clues in this passage that help make sense of Paul’s question. When considering the scriptural connection between God’s strength, power, and jealousy, the mention of strength in verse 22 is a natural progression after acknowledging the Lord’s jealousy. There is a link between the Lord’s power to destroy and the Lord’s strength to forgive, to deliver, and to vindicate the people. 102 In Numbers 14, a passage alluded to in Paul’s recital of Israel’s wilderness wanderings earlier in chapter 10, Moses urges God to act with mercy based on the reputation of God’s strength (ἰσχυς, Num 14:13,17) among the nations (cf. Deut 32:27). Here Moses equates God’s strength with God’s power to rescue the people from the Egyptians (Num 14:13), and Moses urges the Lord to display strength again by forgiving the people and being faithful to bring them to the land that God had promised (14:16–17). In Num 14:16, Moses gives voice to what the nations would think if God were to destroy all the people in the desert, “It is because the Lord was not able to bring this people into the land that he promised to them that he destroyed them in the desert.” Interestingly, God’s strength here is equated not with God’s ability to destroy, but with God’s ability to deliver. According to Moses’ reasoning in Num 14:16, God’s strength will be displayed only by remaining faithful to God’s promises to bring the people into the land of promise. In Numbers 14, the Lord vows to keep the promise to provide the land, but also vows to destroy those who had witnessed the Lord’s signs and wonders and were still disobedient (Num 14:20–24). Thus, God’s strength is equated with faithfulness, but also with vengeance (Num 14:20–24). Numbers 14 is not the only passage that could be influencing Paul’s argument. It is also clear from Deuteronomy 32 that God has the strength to abolish the people (32:26) and even to vindicate them (32:36). In a study of the Targumim of Deuteronomy 32, Brian Rosner points out that epithets employing “strength” as a divine title or attribute are virtually unique to Deuteronomy 32: “Israel follows other gods when they feel strong (cf. 1 Cor 10:12, ‘Let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he should fall’) and in response,

those who boast as the “strong” (ἰσχυροί). While some of these boasters might be on the opposing side of the “weak” who lack knowledge in 8:1–13, the opposing group in chapter 8 are those who have knowledge. If Paul is referring back to these people, then he would have been better served to ask whether they have more knowledge than God. See also Brian Rosner, “Stronger than He? The Strength of 1 Corinthians 10:22b,” TynBul 43 (1992): 171–179, 172. 102 So also Rosner, “No Other Gods,” 153–54; idem, “Stronger than He?,” 174.

C. 1 Corinthians 10:21-22: Κοινωνία with a Jealous God

119

the Lord purposes to show himself strong by punishing the Israelites.”103 The Lord’s strength stands in contrast to the false gods who have failed to protect them (Deut 32:37–38), and, in spite of God’s anger, he is still merciful and compassionate (32:36, 39). In Deuteronomy 32, the Lord vows to hide his face from the people (32:20), considers utterly annihilating them from human memory (32:26), mocks their reliance upon other “gods” (32:37), and reminds them of his ultimate power (32:39–43). “See now that I, even I, am he; there is no god beside me. I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and no one can deliver from my hand” (32:39). If the scriptural witness of texts like Deuteronomy 32 and Numbers 14 form the background of Paul’s allusion here, then it is a natural progression to ask whether or not the Corinthians, who upon making the Lord jealous, are stronger than the God who rescued them from the power of Death (1 Cor 15:51–58). In light of Numbers 14, Paul’s insistence on God’s faithfulness in 10:13 serves as further proof of God’s strength. Paul promises that regardless of the power of the temptation that God is able to provide a way to avoid temptation’s strength. Thus, in the literary context of verse 22, the reference to God’s strength immediately follows illustrations of God’s power to destroy (10:5–10) and the affirmation of God’s faithfulness (10:13). Even if the Corinthians are unfamiliar with the stories of Numbers 14 or the Song of Deuteronomy 32, Paul’s second question recalls the severity of God’s wrath (10:6–11) and the peril of abandoning the Rock of their salvation (10:4).104 In 1 Cor 10:5, although Paul does not refer to God’s strength, he does connect God’s displeasure to the overthrow of some in the wilderness.105 The outcome of the ancestral transgressions in 10:6–11 further illustrate the potential consequences of unfaithfulness. It is unclear whether God overthrew the faithless ancestors (Deut 32:19–26) or whether he allowed them to follow the cravings of their hearts (1 Cor 10:6) and thus abandon the Rock of their salvation (Deut 32:15) and step into the sphere of destruction (1 Cor 5:5; 8:11). By formulating the argument so that a hint of God’s judgment comes immediately after a question of provoking God’s jealousy, the Corinthians, at the very least, are reminded of Paul’s rehearsal of the exodus narrative in 10:1– 13, in which God was not pleased with most of the Israelites and allowed their destruction in the wilderness (10:5). Paul’s questions press the church to consider that they are indeed in a precarious position, and they need to learn from the mistakes of their “ancestors” (10:6, 11). 103

Rosner, “No Other Gods,” 156. Here God’s wrath is equated with allowing the ancestors to turn away and to follow the desires of their hearts, and these actions led to their destruction. Cf. Rom 1:18–32. 105 The language in 1 Cor 10:5b is remarkably similar to Num 14:16b. (1 Cor 10:5: κατεστρώθησαν γὰρ ἐν τῇ ἐρήµῳ. Num 14:16b: κατέστρωσεν αὐτοὺς ἐν τῇ ἐρήµῳ.) For a discussion of κατεστρώθησαν see Oropeza, Paul and Apostasy, 126–128. 104

120

Chapter 3: The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present

The Corinthians who are eating meat that has been sacrificed to idols may not have actually participated in the preparing of the sacrifice as God accuses the Israelites in Deuteronomy 32. They are, however, eating before gods whom their “ancestors” did not fear (Deut 32:17). The Lord chastises Israel for thinking that foreign gods had the power to protect the people. In Deuteronomy 32, God mocks the Israelites’ honoring of the other gods: “Then he will say: Where are their gods, the rock in which they took refuge, who ate the fat of their sacrifices, and drank the wine of their libations? Let them rise up and help you, let them be your protection!” (32:37–38). This text suggests κοινωνία between the one who is honored and the people who participate.106 By being present at the table of another god, some of the Corinthians are placing themselves in real danger of infidelity to a powerful God and, thereby, coming perilously close to provoking the Lord’s jealousy. According to Fotopoulos, any who attended a meal in the temple precincts would have shared in the rites of honoring the gods of the temple by their very presence at the feast. A libation would have been poured at every meal, and all participants would have drunk this wine that has honored the gods.107 All meat served in the temple precincts would have first been sacrificed, even if the Corinthian believers were not physically present at the sacrificial ceremony.108 Paul’s final questions in 10:22 prompt the audience to wonder whether they, by participating in the temple banquets, are in a better position than the majority of their ancestors who were overthrown in the wilderness. Summary Allusions to Israel’s sacred texts drive Paul’s dire warnings in 1 Cor 10:1–22. These allusions are not merely proof-texts or illustrations. They inform Paul’s view of God, and Paul uses these stories of God to instruct the Corinthians. As C. K. Barrett observes, “The history of Israel proves that even God’s elect, fortified by the means of grace provided by God himself, cannot consider themselves automatically and permanently secure against temptation, and in particular against the worship of other gods.”109 References to the Corinthians’ eucharistic practice evoke the church’s κοινωνία with a jealous God. Paul uses the stories of God’s work in the exodus and the Lord’s activity through the cross to illustrate the threat of syncretism with their old world. The ancestral narratives demonstrate to the Corinthians the real consequences 106 A covenant is suggested by the link between God and God’s people that serves as the underlying presupposition of the jealousy motif in Deut 32:21 and by the reality that the world is divided into God’s people and “those who are not my people” (32:21). Also, adherence to the words of the law is associated with life itself in 32:46–47. 107 Fotopoulos, Food Offered to Idols, 258. 108 Fotopoulos, Food Offered to Idols, 70, 174–178. 109 Barrett, 1 Corinthians, 230.

D. Conclusions for 1 Corinthians 10:14-22

121

at stake when the people, whom God has chosen, fail to take the Lord’s name seriously. As 10:22 reminds the letter’s audience, the Lord is a jealous God. The exodus is a story that displays the Lord’s power to choose an oppressed people and to display divine majesty through them to the nations. Like the ancestors, the Corinthians are part of a community that is God’s doing. They are, after all, God’s field, God’s building, and God’s temple (3:1–23), and Paul warns them to be faithful to the one who called them.

D. Conclusions for 1 Corinthians 10:14–22 D. Conclusions for 1 Corinthians 10:14-22

In 1 Cor 10:14–22, Paul explicitly relates the lessons learned from the ancestors to the present quandary before the Corinthian believers: whether it is acceptable to eat meat that has been offered to idols in the precincts of local temples. Paul begins his admonition in this section with the explicit warning to avoid idolatry. This command sets the tone for the three-stage argument that follows. In the first stage, verses 16–17, the apostle recalls the Corinthians’ fellowship with Christ and fellowship with one another through the ritual of the eucharist. These verses reveal Paul’s expectation of the κοινωνία that should result from table fellowship. Although Paul will correct the Corinthians’ eucharistic practices in 11:17–34, even here Paul expresses how the Lord’s table should function in the life of the community. Reading 10:16–17 in concert with Paul’s instructions in chapter 11 reveals that eucharist performed in a worthy manner creates unity (11:27; 10:16–17), proclaims the story of Jesus to serve as a behavioral guide (11:23–26), and serves as a venue for the Spirit’s transformation of the participants into the eschatological community who bears witness to Christ’s return (11:26). For the believers to show any deference to other idols by their presence in the local temple threatens the testimony of the eucharistic story, endangers the fellowship of the community, and mocks the covenant with God to which the eucharist bears witness. In the second stage of the argument (10:18–20), Paul uses two examples to highlight the perilous situation of those who eat before idols: the Israelites (10:18) and the nations (10:19–20). The example of the Israelites recalls the rehearsal in 10:1–13 and urges the Corinthians to avoid what happened to the ancestors when they failed to be faithful. Verses 19–20, on the other hand, refers to the Corinthians’ own dilemma introduced in 8:1–13. Although acknowledging the theological principles marshaled by the Corinthians (8:4–6), Paul expands their thought world by reframing the perception of their table partners. Paul interchanges the term “idols” for “demons” to disclose the real threat of the spiritual powers that the idols represent. In Paul’s argument the table of the Lord should not be mixed with the table of demons (cf. 6:12–20).

122

Chapter 3: The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present

Finally, if the mention of demons were not enough to alarm the Corinthians, Paul ends the segment with two pointed questions: “Are we provoking the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?” These questions recall scripture’s testimony to the jealousy of God and the Lord’s demand for faithfulness. Deuteronomy 32 sheds light on how God’s jealousy and strength are related. For the Corinthians, there is an immediate reference to God’s strength in the ancestral examples of 10:1–13. These questions should shock the Corinthians into realizing the danger of placing themselves in any scenario that could be construed as idolatrous and should make them see the dangers of becoming accustomed to temple ceremonies that fail to glorify the one true God.

E. Revisiting the Whole: Reading 1 Corinthians 10:1–22 E. Revisiting the Whole: Reading 1 Corinthians 10:1-22

After looking in detail at the segments of Paul’s argument in 10:1–22, it is necessary to consider this argument as a whole and to form conclusions about how this text functions in its literary setting. Since the focus of this book is on Paul’s use of exodus traditions in this letter, some observations must first be made concerning Paul’s reading of the exodus. Then, I will revisit how this foundational tradition about God fuels Paul’s advice to the Corinthians. I. Reading the Exodus through the Wisdom of the Cross As noted in the reading of 1 Cor 10:1–13, Paul takes many liberties in his reading of the exodus. One of the most striking features of Paul’s reading is his description of the ancestors’ experiences through the filter of the Corinthians’ worship. Paul reads the exodus through the lens of God’s work in the cross. Meeks observes, “The node around which Pauline beliefs crystallized was the crucifixion and resurrection of God’s son, the Messiah.”110 References to Christ even infuse Paul’s reading of the exodus. Not only have the ancestors undergone baptism, but they have partaken of a eucharist of sorts.111 In 10:4, Christ is the source of spiritual sustenance in the desert. It is not insignificant that Jesus makes an appearance in Paul’s exodus rehearsal. The word of the cross reveals for Paul what God is doing in the world (1 Cor 1:18–2:5). It is through Christ that God has formed κοινωνία with the Corinthians and has fashioned them into one people (vv. 16–17). Reading the exodus story theologically, therefore, has radical social implications for those who would be identified as the church of God.

110 111

Meeks, First Urban Christians, 180. Both rituals enact Christ’s death, Rom 6:3–4; 1 Cor 10:16; 11:23–26.

E. Revisiting the Whole: Reading 1 Corinthians 10:1-22

123

Paul emphasizes God’s presence among the people. The ancient ancestors are accompanied by a cloud, the symbol of the Lord’s presence (10:1–2). They are “under the cloud” and baptized “in the cloud.” The reference to spiritual food and spiritual drink indicates that the source of these substances is God (10:3–4). To Paul, the Corinthians’ gatherings of worship should also indicate the presence of God among the people (14:25). Paul identifies the Corinthians as the “church of God” (1:2; 10:32), God’s temple (3:16–17; 6:19), God’s building (3:9), and God’s field (3:9). In 10:1–22, the story of God’s deliverance of the ancestors intersects with the story of God’s actions through the cross to remind the Corinthians of the God whom they serve. Two characteristics of God are prominent in Paul’s argument. The first trait mentioned is God’s faithfulness (10:13). After placing the Israelites in a parallel situation with the Corinthians, Paul urges the Corinthians to place their trust in a faithful God. The ancestors’ unfaithfulness led to most being destroyed in the desert (10:5–10). God, Paul says, will provide a way to avoid the temptations that led to most of Israel’s destruction. The second characteristic of God that is highlighted by Paul’s argument is the corollary of God’s faithfulness – God’s jealousy. The Lord’s demand for faithfulness in return is the explicit appeal of verses 14–22. The Corinthians owe their existence to this God (1:30; 6:19–20). God has granted them salvation in Christ and has formed them into a community. This covenant places them in fellowship with the divine and in fellowship with one another. To break this κοινωνία by honoring other gods, therefore, not only is a sin against God, but is also a sin against the community for whom Christ died (8:11–12). Furthermore, unfaithfulness to the Lord risks provoking God’s jealousy. In 10:5–10, Paul demonstrated the real peril of displeasing the Lord. The exodus narratives of Israel’s wilderness wanderings reveal a God who requires fidelity. It would not be wise for the Corinthians to find themselves teetering on the brink of idolatry (10:14–15). II. “God is really among you”: The Story of God for the Church of God For the Corinthians to heed the warnings learned through Israel’s exodus, they must understand that their existence as a people and their very identity as the church of God are totally enmeshed with God’s work and God’s presence. Being unfaithful to this God promises to catapult them back to their former lives of being led astray to mute idols (12:2) or threatens to place them in the footsteps of those who were destroyed in the wilderness (8:10– 12; 11:30). Serving the God revealed through the cross and the resurrection makes this gathering of Corinthians a distinctive people in their environment. Recognizing “one God and one Lord” (8:6) is a key part of their identity as God’s church (1:2; 10:32). Honoring this God, however, requires more than the verbal confession of the knowledgeable in 8:6. Paul’s intertwining of the

124

Chapter 3: The “New” Past in Light of the Perilous Present

exodus story with the story of God’s work through Christ challenges the Corinthians to understand that their κοινωνία in Christ is also a κοινωνία with one another. Thus, the argument of 10:1–22 fuels Paul’s instructions regarding the consumption of idol food in local temples (8:1–13). This section is not a digression, but provides the rationale for Paul’s warnings to avoid sinning against one’s neighbor and sinning against Christ (8:11–12). What Paul has learned about God through Israel’s scriptures is that God is faithful and jealous. What Paul believes about the Corinthian’s relationship with God is mediated through the apocalypse of Christ. The necessity of learning from the transgressions of Israel is a timely word to members of a church who are using their so-called “knowledge” in a way that threatens to lead others astray and situates them on the brink of idolatry. Israel’s scriptures have taught Paul the power of the Lord’s jealousy when the Lord’s people treat their God casually. Paul understands the severity of the Corinthians’ situation, even though they do not. The knowledgeable fail to see the threat of dining with demons, and the weak need the witness of their brothers and sisters in order to remain faithful. The church is in real peril, and Paul’s christocentric reading of the exodus unveils the peril of unfaithfulness. Paul ends the larger argument with some guiding principles by which to judge their behavior. They should consider the good of their brother or sister for whom Christ died (8:11–12; 10:24), and they should bring glory to God in all that they do (10:31). Paul’s closing admonition provides a summary of all that has come before: “So, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all for the glory of God” (10:31).

Chapter Four

Be as You Really Are: 1 Corinthians 5:6–8 In 1 Cor 10:1–22, Paul employs the story of God’s work in Israel’s exodus and the proclamation of God’s provision through the cross to call the Corinthians to live as the holy church of God. Compared to Paul’s extended appeal to the exodus in 1 Corinthians 10, the brief allusion to paschal imagery in 1 Cor 5:6–8 might easily be overlooked. After all, the reference to the contaminating power of yeast is a readily understandable illustration that Paul also employs in Gal 5:9. In 1 Corinthians 5, though, Paul couples the imagery of leaven with the language of Passover in a section where the apostle is commanding the congregation to act swiftly to remove a sinner from their midst. Under-girding Paul’s instruction to the church is the declaration that Christ “our πάσχα” has been slain (5:7b). In Paul’s argument, this christocentric paschal image serves as the rationale for Paul’s admonition. Christ’s role as πάσχα has transformed the believers’ status from ἄδικοι (6:9) to those who are “unleavened” (5:7). However, the church’s tolerance of this man’s behavior, behavior that is not condoned in any part of their society (5:1), is incompatible with a people who have been washed, sanctified, and justified (6:11). The apostle embeds the appeal to paschal imagery in his instructions regarding the man who is having an inappropriate relationship with his father’s wife (1 Cor 5:1–13). There is an integral connection between Paul’s instructions to remove this offender (5:5) and his explicit appeal to Passover imagery in 5:6–8. In fact, far from merely illuminating his command to remove this sinful character from their midst (5:2, 5), Paul’s christocentric interpretation of the paschal tradition supplies the impetus for his severe admonition. Christ “our πάσχα” (5:7) serves as the basis and the imperative for the church to live as “unleavened” and to feast on purity and truth (5:8). The brief exodus allusion in 1 Corinthians 5 draws on God’s relationship with Israel to instruct the predominantly Gentile Corinthian congregation to live as the distinctive church of God in their world. In exodus imagery, and especially in the interpretation of Christ as “our πάσχα,” Paul finds the charge for the Corinthian believers to be a holy people, reflective of the God who called them.

126

Chapter 4: Be As You Really Are

A. 1 Corinthians 5:1–5: The Dilemma A. 1 Corinthians 5:1-5: The Dilemma

Paul has adopted and adapted the paschal tradition to speak to a disturbing situation in the church. In 1 Cor 5:1–5, it is evident that the community has tolerated the sin of a man who is engaging in an act of πορνεία that is not even allowed among the Gentiles. According to Paul, a man is having (ἔχειν) the wife of his father (5:1). Paul does not explain the nature of this relationship. However, since Paul only calls for actions to be taken against the man, it is probable that the woman is not a member of the church. Since Paul does not call out names, he is assuming that all in the community are aware of this situation. Based on Paul’s description of the relationship, it is unclear whether the man’s father is still living or whether the son and the woman are formally married. Chrysostom argued that Paul’s use of the phrase γυναῖκά τοῦ πατρὸς instead of µητρυία, or stepmother, intentionally emphasizes that the father is still married to the woman.1 Thus, by using this phrase, Paul would be demonstrating the severity of the πορνεία. Though this may be the case, it is also possible that Paul describes the relationship in such a manner to echo Israel’s scripture, which strictly forbids such a relationship.2 In Lev 18:18 having a relationship with one’s father’s wife is cause for the death penalty.3 Furthermore, Josephus’s contempt for this type of affair demonstrates that at least in some, if not all, contemporary Hellenistic Jewish circles this incestuous relationship would not be permitted.4 If the father were alive, then the man’s relationship with the father’s wife would also be considered incest under Roman law and frowned upon in Roman society. Furthermore, the penalties for incest were steep.5 The father could be penalized if he did not divorce his unfaithful spouse.6 Tolerating her behavior amounted to lenocinium (enticement) and made him susceptible to the same charges imposed for adultery.7 Paul, however, does not reveal if the father is living. If the father had died, then the son may have married the

1

Chrysostom, 1 Cor. Hom., 15:2. This is the argument of Anthony Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, NIGTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 386. 3 See also Lev 20:11; cf. Deut 23:1; 27:20. See also Sanhedrin 7:4. 4 Josephus, A.J. 3.274. 5 See Andrew D. Clarke, Secular and Christian Leadership in Corinth: A SocioHistorical and Exegetical Study of 1 Corinthians 1–6 (Leiden: Brill, 1993), 77–80; Bruce W. Winter, After Paul Left Corinth: The Influence of Secular Ethics and Social Change (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), 44–57. 6 Winter, After Paul Left Corinth, 51–52. 7 P. E. Corbett, The Roman Law of Marriage (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969), 142. 2

A. 1 Corinthians 5:1-5: The Dilemma

127

woman for reasons pertaining to property or finances.8 Even if the father were dead and the son had cause to marry the woman, however, Paul still describes the relationship as πορνεία “that was not even among the Gentiles” (5:1). Thus, whatever the nature of the relationship, it is significant to Paul’s argument that this behavior would have been considered immoral even by those outside the church. To Paul’s dismay, the Corinthians are not only allowing this behavior, but, according to Paul, they are boasting rather than mourning. First Corinthians 5:6–8 opens with a reference to boasting (5:6).9 The Corinthians’ boasting has blinded them to the sin that is endangering the church (5:1–2). As will be discussed below, Paul undercuts any rationale that they could give for allowing the man’s behavior to continue by reminding this “puffed up” (φυσιόω, 5:2) people that they are actually “unleavened” (5:7). In what are the Corinthians boasting? According to Adela Yarbro Collins, the reference to boasting in 5:2 suggests that some in the community are openly condoning the man’s behavior.10 According to Collins, an influential sector of the community may have been boasting in their liberty in Christ.11 According to this view, the Corinthians would see themselves as free from any scriptural prohibitions regarding this type of πορνεία (Deut 27:20; cf. Lev 18.8; 20:11). Anthony Thiselton contends that the believers saw themselves “on a new plane of life, and felt that they could do anything” because they were above the law.12 Viewing the Corinthians’ boasting as liberty from Jewish law, however, does not explain why previously law-abiding citizens would suddenly feel freedom from all law, including Roman law. Furthermore, if Paul is countering an antinomian congregation, it is odd that he would appeal to purity regulations for a strictly Jewish feast as a means to

8

Regarding the property and patronage issues at stake see J. K. Chow, Patronage and Power: A Study of Social Networks in Corinth, JSNTSup 75 (Sheffield: Sheffield, 1992), 130–141; Clarke, Secular and Christian Leadership in Corinth, 73–88. Cf. H. Lietzmann who believes that the son marries the father’s divorced wife while the father is still living (An die Korinther, Handbuch zum Neuen Testament 9 [Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1949], 23). For other views of the nature of the relationship between the man and the father’s wife see Craig Steven De Vos, “Stepmothers, Concubines and the Case of ΠΟΡΝΕΙΑ in 1 Corinthians 5,” NTS 44 (1998): 104–114; H. Conzelman, 1 Corinthians (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975), 96; C. K. Barrett, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (New York: Harper & Row, 1968), 122. 9 The charge of boasting is repeatedly mentioned in this letter (1 Cor 1:29, 31; 3:21; 4:6, 7, 18, 19). 10 Adela Yarbro Collins, “The Function of ‘Excommunication’ in Paul,” HTR 73 (1980): 253. 11 Collins, “The Function of ‘Excommunication’ in Paul,” 253. See also Richard Horsley, 1 Corinthians, ANTC (Nashville: Abingdon, 1998), 79. 12 Thiselton, First Corinthians, 388.

128

Chapter 4: Be As You Really Are

challenge their behavior.13 Rather than reflecting an antinomian stance on the part of his opponents, Paul’s rhetoric suggests that the Corinthians’ “knowledge” on various issues lies at the heart of their boasting throughout this letter (1:18–2:16; 8:1–7; 13:8–13). Since there are multiple pleas to stop boasting throughout the first four chapters (1:29, 30; 3:21; 4:7, 18, 19; 5:2, 6), it is likely that there is a vocal and influential sector in this community who deem themselves knowledgeable or who are esteemed by others. Perhaps, these influential members are boasting that a man of higher social status is affiliated with the community rather than boasting in his flagrant violation of accepted mores. Paul’s reference to their boasting could also demonstrate how ridiculous their claims to be knowledgeable really are. These so-called knowledgeable people have failed to notice the danger of this man’s sin for the well-being of community. Unlike the issue of eating food offered to idols (8:1–13), there is no evidence that this man’s relationship has created open discussion within the church (cf. 8:1–13). Since there appear to be factions in this church (1:10– 17), however, it is highly unlikely that all the believers are unified in support of this man’s behavior.14 Since the official letter from the Corinthian church fails to mention this situation,15 it appears that Paul learned of the issue from Chloe’s people. Though we do not know for certain who “Chloe’s people” are, it is plausible that they work for Chloe’s household and are not members of the upper class. They, like others who may be offended by the behavior, are likely not in a position to reproach the man, as will be discussed below. It is evident by Paul’s response that the church as a whole, however, has made no previous attempts to challenge his behavior.16 The church’s failure to reproach the man could be a reflection of his elevated status. Chrysostom suggested that the man might have been a leader in 13

First Corinthians 4:8 is the key text for arguing that the Corinthians reveled in their liberty from the law, but commentators like Hays have done well in demonstrating parallels between Paul’s imagery and characterizations of the sage by Cynic and Stoic philosophers. Consider Epictetus, Diss. 3.22.49; Plutarch, Tranq. An. 472 a. Richard B. Hays, 1 Corinthians, Interpretation (Louisville: John Knox, 1997), 70–71. 14 The community likely has social stratification, as argued by G. Theissen, The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity: Essays on Corinth, ed. and trans. J. H. Schütz (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1982), 97; A. C. Mitchell, “Rich and Poor in the Courts of Corinth: Litigiousness and Status in 1 Cor 6:1–11,” NTS 39 (1993): 562–586. J.K. Chow argues for multiple factors involved in the various factions at Corinth, but also notes how social standing outside the church can affect relationships within the community: “. . . the Corinthians who kept their contacts with pagans, namely the immoral man, the litigants and the idolaters, may have been people who by their social status within Corinth were able to exercise influence in the church” (Patronage and Power, 123). 15 There is no mention of the Corinthians’ letter to Paul until 7:1. 16 See Collins, “The Function of ‘Excommunication’ in Paul,” 253.

A. 1 Corinthians 5:1-5: The Dilemma

129

the church and that the community was “puffed up” not with regard to his sin but as a result of his teaching.17 While this is possible, it is hard to imagine that this man holds a leadership role granted by the church since Paul neither directly addresses the man nor names him.18 It is plausible, however, that the man is someone who is worthy of respect due to his social status in Corinthian society. The community’s toleration could possibly stem from the obstacles presented by his social status rather than an affirmation of the man’s activity. Andrew Clarke argues that the community’s reluctance to confront the man or to have previously attempted legal proceedings against him is due to his social status.19 A high social status would grant him resources that put him beyond the reach of litigation for most in the community.20 According to Clarke, the man may have served as a patron of the congregation, and in doing so, this created a situation in which the lower status believers were either dependent upon the man or were bound to him by the conventions of the patron client relationship.21 If this is the case, then it might explain why the lower status church members did not perceive themselves to be in a position to confront the man about his behavior. Paul’s command to remove the sinner from their midst, though, was an action akin to shunning him. Though shunning the man is not equal to a legal proceeding, which would have created enmity within the congregation and only served to propagate more disunity,22 shunning is an action that would have social repercussions for those in the position of a “client” in this relationship. Paul commands the believers to hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of his flesh in 5:5. There are roughly two ways that the “destruction of the flesh” has been interpreted.23 First, σάρξ has been equated with the 17

Chrysostom, 1 Cor. Hom. 15:2. Consider 2 Cor 11:5; Gal 1:9; 5:2–12; 6:12; Phil 4:2. 19 Paul certainly would not have condoned a lawsuit against the man (6:1–11), and there is no evidence that the community has attempted this action in this case. Rather, Paul accuses the church of boasting. 20 Clarke, Secular and Christian Leadership, 80–88. See also Chow, Patronage and Power, 123–41. 21 Clarke, Secular and Christian Leadership, 80–88. 22 See Winter, After Paul Left Corinth, 57. Cf. W. Deming, “The Unity of 1 Corinthians 5–6,” JBL 115 (1996): 289–312. 23 There are numerous interpretations that do not fit into these three categories, but they have not gained a wide following. For example, Satan is interpreted as a reference to the civil authorities by J. D. M. Derrett, “‘Handing over to Satan’: an Explanation of 1 Cor 5:1–7,” Revue internationale des droits de l’antiquité 26 (1979), 21. Likewise, V. G. Shillington interprets the man’s death as an allusion to Leviticus 16. The man serves as the scapegoat in the rituals for the Day of Atonement. V. G. Shillington contends: “When the temple-community is profaned by accepting an immoral member, it jeopardized its future salvation in the day of the Lord. But the Christ-community has recourse, even as the Israelite community had with their Day of Atonement: The new temple-community can 18

130

Chapter 4: Be As You Really Are

man’s body.24 Thus, turning the man over to Satan would result in the man’s physical death.25 Proponents of this view find support in Paul’s admonition of those who take the Lord’s Supper in an unworthy manner. In 11:29–30, the apostle claims that those who eat and drink without discerning the body bring judgment upon themselves. As a result of this judgment many are weak and ill, and some have died (11:30). In light of this parallel, some interpreters emphasize the man’s imminent death,26 while others believe that he might suffer slowly, perhaps from a disease.27 Ivan Havener calls his death “capital punishment” that is demanded by Paul with the belief that the “spiritual body” will be saved on the Day of the Lord.28 Yet, this equation of σάρξ only with the man’s body does not take into account how Paul speaks of “flesh” elsewhere.29 contain the sin in the one immoral man, remove him from their fellowship, and hand him over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh,” “Atonement Texture in 1 Corinthians 5.5,” JSNT 71 (1998), 44. Paul never indicates that the man is somehow atoning for all the sin of the community. Furthermore, Paul does not indicate anywhere else that there needs to be a scapegoat for sin. The rest of the letter implies that the Corinthians’ purity comes from God’s actions through Christ (1:2; 6:11, 19–20). 24 Paul uses σάρξ to refer to the physical body in 1 Cor 6:16; 15:39, 50. 25 Conzelman, 1 Corinthians, 97; Barrett, 1 Corinthians, 126–27; F. F. Bruce, 1 and 2 Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971), 54–55; A. Vanbeck allows for death if the man does not repent, “La discipline pénitentielle dans les écrits de Saint Paul,” Revue d’histoire et de littérature religieuses 1 (1910), 244–46. 26 R. Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament (New York: Scribner’s, 1951–55); 1:233; Conzelman, First Corinthians, 97; J. C. Hurd, The Origin of 1 Corinthians (New York: Seabury, 1965), 137; G. W. H. Lampe, “Church Discipline and the Interpretation of the Epistles to the Corinthians,” Christian History and Interpretation: Studies Presented to John Knox, ed. W. F. Farmer, C. F. D. Moule and R. R. Niebuhr (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1967), 349, 353. 27 F. Godet, Commentary on St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1889), 257; M. E. Thrall, The First and Second Letters of Paul to the Corinthians, CBC (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1965), 40; Simon Kistemaker, “‘Deliver this Man to Satan’ (1 Cor 5:5): A Case Study in Church Discipline,” The Master’s Seminary Journal 3 (1992): 33–46, 43. 28 Ivan Havener, “A Curse for Salvation – 1 Corinthians 5:1–5,” in Sin, Salvation, and the Spirit, ed. D. Durken (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1979), 340–41. 29 Havener argues that Paul’s use of σάρξ in 1 Cor 15:44 is more closely akin to the use in 1 Cor 5 than any of the uses in Romans or Galatians (338–340). He contends that flesh in 1 Corinthians always has the notion of “body” associated with it (339). While it is certainly true that Paul uses σάρξ in the sense of a physical body and that 1 Corinthians most often uses σάρξ in a similar manner (1 Cor 1:26, 29; 6:16; 7:28; 10:18; 15:39, 50), Paul often uses σάρξ with the idea of a corrupting element that is hostile to God (2 Cor 7:1; 2 Cor 10:2, 3; Gal 3:3; 4:29; 5:13, 16, 17, 19, 24; 6:8, 12; Rom 7:5; 8:3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13; 9:8; 13:14). Havener, however, quickly dismisses this link, a link that he refers to as the “religious” sense of the word (339). Paul has shown that he is more than capable of using both senses of the word within the same letter. Consider σάρξ as pertaining to physi-

A. 1 Corinthians 5:1-5: The Dilemma

131

A second common interpretation of this phrase interprets “flesh” as the old nature of the man that has been corrupted by the power of sin and is, therefore, hostile to God (Rom 8:1–17).30 Perhaps, Paul hopes that the expulsion will result in the death of this man’s sinful passions and desires, and that he will be saved after undergoing discipline and repentance (Gal 5:24; Rom 8:9–14).31 Turning the man over to the realm of Satan is the same as turning the man over to a realm where the powers of Sin and Death reign (Rom 5:12– 21; 1 Cor 15:12–57). Thus this act could certainly lead to the man’s death, especially if he does not repent and return to the community.32 More importantly, however, by expelling the man from the church, the man is now outside the community, which has the Spirit, the guarantor of life (Rom 8:1– 17, 23–25; 2 Cor 5:5). For this discipline to result in his ultimate salvation, the man must desire to return to the church. Thus, the church must truly be the visible locus of God’s salvation, the distinctive place where God’s healing and wholeness are exhibited. Hays captures the severity of Paul’s instructions when he writes, “In 1 Corinthians 5, we encounter a vision of the church not as one voluntary association among many, but as the covenant people of God; to be inside this community is to find life, and to be outside is to be in the realm of death.”33 In 5:5, Paul expresses hope that “the spirit might be saved in the day of the Lord.” The ambiguity of the term πνεῦµα has spawned at least two ways of cal matters in Gal 1:16; 2:16; 4:13, 14; 2 Cor 7:5; Rom 1:3; 2:28; 3:20; 4:1; 9:3, 5; 11:14 with σάρξ as hostile to God (references above from the same letters). 30 C. H. Talbert, Reading Corinthians: A Literary and Theological Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians (New York: Crossroad, 1987): 13–16; Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978), 210–14; James T. South, “A Critique of the ‘Curse/Death’ Interpretation of 1 Corinthians 5.1–8,” NTS 39 (1993): 539–561; A. Robertson and A. Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians, 2nd ed. (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1978): 99–100; L. Morris, The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1958), 88; Hays, 1 Corinthians, 86; N. G. Joy, “Is the Body Really to Be Destroyed? (1 Corinthians 5:5),” The Bible Translator 39 (1988): 429–36; A. C. Thiselton, “The Meaning of Σάρξ in 1 Corinthians 5.5: A Fresh Approach in the Light of Logical and Semantic Factors,” Scottish Journal of Theology 26 (1973): 204–28; J. Cambier, “La Chair et l’Esprit en 1 Cor. v.5,” NTS 15 (1969): 221–232; cf. Adela Yarbro Collins who connects the term παραδίδωµι with curse formulas in Greek magical papyri, but also interprets 5:5 in light of Paul’s view of flesh in Rom 8:6–8. Collins argues, “‘destruction of the flesh’ in 1 Cor 5:5 should be interpreted as the fiery trial of all creation, in which ‘the flesh,’ namely those elements and aspects of creation hostile to God, will be destroyed,” “The Function of ‘Excommunication’ in Paul,” 259. 31 Gal 5:13, 19, 24; Rom 7:5–6, 18, 25; 8:3–8, 10, 13; see Hays, 1 Corinthians, 86. 32 Barrett, 1 Corinthians, 126; Shillington, “Atonement Texture in 1 Corinthians 5.5,” 39. 33 Hays, 1 Corinthians, 89.

132

Chapter 4: Be As You Really Are

interpreting this enigmatic phrase at the end of verse 5. First, the term has been equated with the Holy Spirit that is in the community. According to Barth Campbell, God’s Spirit must be preserved in the congregation.34 Likewise, Adela Yarbro Collins writes, “The reference to the spirit in v 5 is best understood in terms of the Holy Spirit of God and Christ which dwells in the community.”35 Paul, however, never speaks of the Holy Spirit’s need for salvation. As Hays notes, Paul uses the language of salvation and especially the verb σώζω to refer to humanity’s eschatological deliverance (e.g., 1 Cor 1:18, 21; 3:15; 7:16; 9:22; 10:33; 15:2).36 Second, the spirit could refer to the man himself. Paul uses πνεῦµα to refer to his own spirit in 5:4: τοῦ ἐµοῦ πνεύµατος.37 Likewise in 5:3, πνεῦµα is associated with Paul, although here, as in 5:5, he does not use the possessive pronoun. The connection of the man’s expulsion with the Passover tradition suggests that he is now outside of the protection of the blood on the doorpost,38 but Paul still offers hope for his spirit’s salvation. Although Paul offers hope for the man’s salvation, the immoral man is not the focus of Paul’s advice. The apostle fears that the church’s tolerance of this man’s sin threatens the whole body. In light of 5:6– 8, Paul’s command should be read with reference to the overall concern for the purity of the community.39 Whatever the cause for the Corinthians’ lack of action in reproving the man’s behavior, Paul is appalled that they have not yet recognized how dangerous this sin is to the community. His anger is chiefly directed at the community, not the individual. Paul’s appeal to the imagery of the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread in 5:6–8 provides important background for reading the command to expel this man from the church. Part of shaping the identity of the Corinthians into a “new lump” requires that all “leaven” be

34

Barth Campbell, “Flesh and Spirit in 1 Cor 5:5: An Exercise in Rhetorical Criticism of the NT,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 36 (1993): 331–42. See also Collins, 1 Corinthians, 213; Shillington, “Atonement Texture in 1 Corinthians 5.5,” 35. 35 Collins, “The Function of ‘Excommunication’ in Paul,” 259. 36 Hays, 1 Corinthians, 85–86. 37 See also Rom 1:9; cf. 1 Cor 2:11; 4:21; 5:3; Rom 8:10, 16. 38 Richard B. Hays, The Conversion of the Imagination (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 24. 39 See also, Collins, “The Function of ‘Excommunication’ in Paul,” 259. Maria Pascuzzi rightly argues against reading 1 Cor 5:1–13 as a sign of Paul’s struggle for apostolic authority (Ethics, Ecclesiology and Church Discipline: A Rhetorical Analysis of 1 Corinthians 5 [Rome: Gregorian University Press, 1997], 12). Paul does speak with authority, but only because the church has failed to do so. Cf. Havener, “A Curse for Salvation,” 338.

B. 1 Corinthians 5:6-8: Be As You Really Are

133

removed. This contaminating element is endangering the whole and threatening to dilute the church’s social distinctiveness from the world.40

B. 1 Corinthians 5:6–8: Be As You Really Are B. 1 Corinthians 5:6-8: Be As You Really Are

In light of Paul’s use of exodus traditions elsewhere in this letter, it is not surprising that he would appeal to the Passover in his call for purity in chapter 5. His inclusion of Jew and Gentile in his assertion that Christ is “our πάσχα” bolsters his invitation for all to join in the feast. Paul’s incorporation and transformation of the Passover imagery establishes the former “Gentiles” as insiders to a new people and challenges them to be who they really are – holy ones. A close examination of 1 Cor 5:6–8 provides the necessary framework to understand Paul’s instructions regarding the sinful man in 5:1– 5 and the clarification of Paul’s previous instructions in light of this scandal in 5:9–13. I. 1 Corinthians 5:6–7a: Cleanse Out the Old Leaven The question in 5:6 first introduces the paschal allusions: “Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump?”41 This leaven imagery could have been understood without any particular knowledge of the Passover (cf. Gal 5:9). The following verses, however, place this question within the context of the combined festivals of Unleavened Bread and Passover.42 The reference to the leaven as a contaminating element was particularly appropriate to Paul’s concern for holiness.43 Each week, as a new batch of dough was made, a small lump of the previous week’s dough would be incorporated into the new dough to cause the lump to rise. Before baking, a portion of this amalgamated dough was reserved for the next batch and so on and so forth. Although this was a convenient way to make bread, the portion that was held over from the previous batch was particularly prone to contamination. As it fermented, it risked exposure to dirt and various kinds of pests, and these 40

Regarding social distinctiveness and moral behavior, see Meeks, First Urban Christians, 97. In Gal 5:9 the maxim (“A little leaven leavens the whole lump”) is not used primarily to preserve social distinctiveness but to rid the community of the viewpoint of those who have caused the Galatians to question Paul’s gospel teaching. 41 Cf. Mark 8:15; Matt 16:6, 11–12; Luke 12:1. 42 Contra Joop F. M. Smit who interprets the leaven imagery as a proverb without seeing the relationship to the paschal imagery that follows, “‘That Someone Has the Wife of His Father:’ Paul’s Argumentation in 1 Cor 5:1–13,” Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 80 (2004): 131–143. 43 Regarding the necessity to remove leaven, consider Exod 12:12–20. See also m. Pes. 1.1.

134

Chapter 4: Be As You Really Are

contaminating elements not only tainted the next batch of dough, but were handed on from week to week.44 Once a year the Jews would break the chain and begin all over again with fresh, unleavened dough. According to Exod 12:15, on the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread the celebrants were to remove all leaven from their houses and were to partake only of unleavened bread for seven days. Of course, we cannot know with certainty what was practiced at the time of Paul, especially in the Diaspora, but the biblical texts provide some guidance as to the ideal. According to Exodus 12, whoever failed to observe the paschal ordinances was cut off from the congregation of Israel (Exod 12:15, 19). 45 Exodus 12:17 recalls the significance of this festival: “You shall observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread, for on this very day I brought your hosts out of the land of Egypt; therefore you shall observe this day throughout your generations as a permanent ordinance.” Deuteronomy 16:3 reminds its readers that the significance of the unleavened bread stems from the haste in which Israel exited Egypt, and eating this bread served to remind participants of the night of their deliverance. Although the reference to the permeating nature of the leaven could have been understood without knowledge of Israel’s traditions, knowing the significance of the unleavened bread for the jointly celebrated Feasts of Unleavened Bread and Passover heightens the pertinence of this allusion to the Corinthians’ situation. On the surface, Paul sees the disastrous consequences of letting the church become distorted and misshapen by a tainting element that threatens to contaminate the whole.46 As leaven permeates a whole lump of dough, tolerating the sin of this man endangers the community in at least two ways. First, by harboring this man, others might be tempted to imitate his behavior. Paul’s extended warnings in 6:12–20 imply that others might be persuaded to follow suit.47 Indeed, the instructions in 8:10–13 reveal that 44

Thiselton, 1 Corinthians, 406–7; C. L. Mitton, “New Wine in Old Wine Skins: IV. Leaven,” Expository Times 84 (1972/73): 339–343; J. K. Howard, “‘Christ our Passover’: A Study of the Passover–Exodus Theme in 1 Corinthians,” EvQ 41 (1969): 97–108. 45 According to Philo, Moses made special accommodations for those who were mourning (Mos. 2.224-233). 46 So also Thiselton, 1 Corinthians, 401. 47 For arguments regarding the unity of 1 Corinthians 5–6 see Margaret Mitchell, Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation: An Exegetical Investigation of the Language and Composition of 1 Corinthians (Westminster/John Knox, 1991): 1–19, 184–293; Deming, “The Unity of 1 Corinthians 5–6,” 289–312; P. S. Minear, “Christ and the Congregation: 1 Corinthians 5–6,” RevExp 80 (1983): 341–350, esp. 342; Lambert D. Jacobs, “Establishing a New Value System in Corinth: 1 Corinthians 5–6 as Persuasive Argument,” in The Rhetorical Analysis of Scripture: Essays from the 1995 London Conference, ed. S. E. Porter and T. H. Olbricht, JSNTSup 146 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1997): 374–387; L. William Countryman, Dirt, Greed, and Sex: Sexual Ethics in the New Testament and their Implications for Today (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988), 194–204; Benjamin Fiore, “Passion

B. 1 Corinthians 5:6-8: Be As You Really Are

135

some in the congregation are particularly impressionable. Michael Goulder argues that the slogans in 6:12–13 were originally championed by those eating idol food.48 The statement in 6:13 (“Food is meant for the stomach and the stomach for food”) certainly lends itself to a setting where the consumption of idol food might be discussed. Goulder believes that the immoral man used this slogan to justify his current behavior. Thus, the words in verse 12, “all things are lawful for me,” were said by the man.49 Since this same phrase appears in the context of the idol food debate in 10:23, it is certainly plausible that the man is using the same slogans that were employed in the food discussions. Rather than considering the statement as representative of the man’s supporters, Goulder emphatically argues that the man’s brazen behavior does not represent a larger group of libertines who believe that anything is permissible “in the Lord.”50 Goulder demonstrates that it is not necessary to have a group of libertines as Paul’s opponents. His argument that the man is acting alone is less convincing. If this were indeed the case, it is bizarre that Paul never directly addresses the offender in this passage. He only speaks to the community as a whole. Instead of challenging the man’s rationale, Paul refers to him in the third person in 6:16 as ὁ κολλώµενος.51 Paul’s instructions to the community suggest Paul’s belief that his behavior is, at the very least, condoned or enabled by some in the congregation. In light of the impact that the man’s behavior could have on the church, Paul reframes the man’s behavior to highlight the threat to the whole community, as members of Christ (6:15). If the man is acting without the explicit support of the congregation, Paul treats the community’s toleration of his behavior as an act of affirmation. Even if some were not imitating the behavior, Paul desires that the community understand the severity of πορνεία as an act against the body (6:13, 18)52 and as an act against the other members of

in Paul and Plutarch: 1 Corinthians 5–6 and the Polemic against Epicureans,” in Greeks, Romans, and Christians: Essays in Honor of Abraham Malherbe, ed. David L. Balch, Everett Ferguson, and Wayne A. Meeks (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 135–43. 48 Michael D. Goulder, “Libertines? (1 Cor 5–6),” NovT 41 (1999): 345. 49 Goulder, “Libertines?,” 345. 50 This is part of Goulder’s larger thesis that the opponents in Corinth are Jewish believers. In chapters 5–6, Goulder identifies the opponents as Jewish Christian ascetics. See “Libertines?” 347–348; idem, Paul and the Competing Mission in Corinth (Peabody: Hendrickson, 2001). 51 The singular noun πόρνη refers back to the γυναῖκά τοῦ πατρὸς of 5:1. See Goulder, “Libertines?”, 346. De Vos argues that the man has likely taken the woman as a concubine, since it was illegal under Roman law to marry the spouse of one’s deceased father (“Stepmothers, Concubines and the case of Πορνεία in 1 Corinthians 5,” 104–114). 52 The concern for πορνεία links 5:1–13 and 6:12–20. See cognates in 5:1, 9, 10, 11; 6:9, 13, 15, 16 and 18. See also Jacobs, “Establishing a New Value System in Corinth,”

136

Chapter 4: Be As You Really Are

Christ (6:15). According to Stacy Obenhaus, the leaven imagery indicates that the church is “an indivisible unity, a more permeant unity than suggested by the metaphors of the church as God’s temple, with each person a building block, or of the church as the body of Christ, with each person a part of that body (1 Cor 3:10–17, 12:12–27).”53 The second danger this sin poses for the community is the witness of the church. This man’s sin makes the Corinthians look less moral than their Gentile neighbors and jeopardizes their testimony to a holy God. Paul presents the man’s sin as intolerable in the Corinthians’ world.54 Although there is much debate about how to interpret the phrase “not even among the Gentiles,”55 the opening line rhetorically lumps the Corinthians together in a shameful position over against those whom they would certainly believe to be less honorable than they themselves. Paul’s reference to their boasting heaps more shame upon them for tolerating such an act.56 In 6:19–20, Paul attempts to place their behavior in perspective when he reminds the believers that their bodies are not their own, but belong to God. Just as he does in 10:31, Paul charges the Corinthians to glorify God (6:20). Glorifying God is the standard for how the Corinthians are to view themselves and to behave in their environment, because they are God’s church (1:2; 10:32; 11:22; 15:9). Proper observance of the Feast of Unleavened Bread requires both the removal of leaven and the excommunication of anyone consuming leaven (Exod 12:15 and 19). These rites are significant for reading 1 Cor 5:7a: 382. Peter Zaas also argues for a word-play between πόρνος and πονήρος, “‘Cast Out the Evil Man from Your Midst’ (1 Cor 5:13b),” JBL 103 (1984): 259–261. 53 Stacy Obenhaus, “Sanctified Entirely: The Theological Focus of Paul’s Instructions for Church Discipline,” Restoration Quarterly 43 (2001): 4; see also Pascuzzi, Ethics, Ecclesiology and Church Discipline, 158–162. 54 Goulder states, “Often an heir may have slept with his father’s slave-girls without a thought, and the concubinage is only scandalous when Paul’s theology makes it so.” “Libertines?”, 348. However, this statement equates the γυναῖκά τοῦ πατρὸς with a slave-girl. Paul does not refer to the woman as a slave. 55 For a discussion on the possible customs and laws to which Paul refers see Clarke, Secular and Christian Leadership in Corinth, 77–80; Jane F. Gardner, Women in Roman Law and Society (Bloomington : Indiana University Press, 1986), 126–27; Winter, After Paul Left Corinth, 44–57. For a survey of important Jewish background and parallels to the intolerance of this sin see B. S. Rosner, Paul, Scripture, and Ethics (Leiden: Brill, 1994): 61–63. For a parallel use of Paul’s rhetorical strategy in Seneca, see P. Hartog, “‘Not Even Among the Pagans’ (1 Cor 5:1): Paul and Seneca on Incest,” in The New Testament and Early Christian Literature in Greco-Roman Context: Studies in Honor of David E. Aune, ed. John Fotopoulos (Leiden: Brill, 2006), 51–64; cf. Pascuzzi, Ethics, Ecclesiology, and Church Discipline, 103–106. 56 The charge of boasting also recalls earlier pieces of the letter and connects this argument with what has come before: καυχᾶσαι (4:7), ἐφυσιώθησαν (4:18), πεφυσιωµένων (4:19), πεφυσιωµένοι (5:2), καύχηµα (5:6).

B. 1 Corinthians 5:6-8: Be As You Really Are

137

“Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened.” Since the purity of the community is of utmost concern for Paul, he urges removal of the contaminating element.57 Rather than correct the man himself, Paul is more anxious that this behavior has been allowed to take place within the church: “And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn? Let him who has done this be removed from among you” (5:2). As verses 2 and 7 both affirm, the church has responsibility to help one another glorify God. As the Israelites were to remove all the leaven from their houses, so Paul is commanding the church to remove the sinner from their midst. It is up to the community to maintain its boundaries. There is no command given in Exodus 12 that addresses the one who rejects the festival. Instead, those who remain in the community are addressed. The traditions associated with Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread serve two interrelated functions: remembering God’s acts of salvation and identifying a people as those chosen by God. First and foremost, these rituals recall what God has done to save God’s people. Those who participate in the feasts are not only identifying themselves with other participants, but the very act of participation becomes an identity marker for outside observers.58 Those not wishing to participate do not associate themselves as members of the group, and, therefore, the re-enactment of the tradition through ritual performance practically serves to bolster the group’s solidarity. A good example of this is the expulsion of those who fail to remove leaven during the Feast of Unleavened Bread. By abstaining from ritual observance, these individuals have effectively removed themselves from the group by not affirming their continued identity among the congregation of Israel. Those who continue to observe the Lord’s festivals and follow his commands comprise the people of Israel. For the Israelites, the act of removing the leaven served to purify the food supply of the household and functioned as a time to relive the night in which God brought his people out of Egypt (Exod 12:17). However, this ritual was also one of cleansing and transformation. The removal of leaven is only one facet of the festival. If the removal of leaven were the only issue, Paul might have stopped his instructions with 5:6. The performance of the rituals serves to define a group by establishing boundaries, but for the “insiders” the actualization of the ritual has transformative power. According to Catharine Bell, the group performing the ritual undergoes metamorphoses in the process of

57

See Dale B. Martin, The Corinthian Body (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995): 168–174; Rosner, Paul, Scripture, and Ethics, 73–78; Hartog, “Paul and Seneca on Incest,” 64. 58 Catharine Bell, Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992), 28.

138

Chapter 4: Be As You Really Are

re-enacting the traditions that they claim as sacred.59 For the Israelites, performing the rituals of Unleavened Bread and Passover signaled remembrance of past salvation, but also, by the act of continual remembrance, observance of the ritual served as an outward manifestation of their identity as the chosen people whom God had delivered. The identity of the people is thoroughly intertwined with the identity of their God. As the golden calf incident well demonstrates, the Israelites, however, had to learn how to be a community bound in covenant relationship with a holy and jealous God (Exodus 32; cf. 1 Cor 10:7). In a world where monotheism was not the norm, the people had to be taught what it meant to bear witness to a distinctive God. Rituals like those accompanying the Feast of Unleavened Bread and Passover inform the Israelites’ worldview and help shape them into a new people.60 For participants in the festival, removal of the leaven and recalling God’s salvation reminded them that they are part of a heritage of divine faithfulness and provided an arena in which God’s Spirit transformed them into God’s people. Significantly, Paul appeals to paschal traditions that are intertwined with Israel’s identity as the people of God. Paul’s demand for these Corinthians to participate in the rituals of cleansing and remembrance establishes their identity as insiders. As Edward Adams observes, Paul is concerned with “the social distinction between the church and larger society,” but he also stresses the “ethical distinctiveness of the Christian community (5:6–8).”61 In effect, Paul’s advice reinforces the community boundaries of a church who still must live among unbelievers (5:9–11). Furthermore, the imperative for the Corinthians to cleanse out the leaven places them in the same situation as the Israelites commemorating the Feast of Unleavened Bread. The charge challenges the Corinthians to be as they already are – unleavened. This pure status reminds them of who they are in Christ. In 6:11, Paul will tell the believers that they have been washed, sanctified, and justified by God. They have been chosen by God (1:2, 30), and they are God’s holy temple (3:16–17). As the temple of God, Paul expects them to act in a manner that is congruent with their identity. He demands that they act like insiders. They are not only invited to the feast, but they are responsible for preparing for it, especially since God has already provided the sacrifice.

59

Bell, Ritual Theory, 100. Bell, Ritual Theory, 109–110. 61 Edward Adams, Constructing the World: A Study in Paul’s Cosmological Language (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2000), 126. 60

B. 1 Corinthians 5:6-8: Be As You Really Are

139

II. 1 Corinthians 5:7b: The Paschal Sacrifice 1. Christ, Our Πάσχα The basis for Paul’s bold reinterpretation of Israel’s traditions lies at the end of 5:7: “For Christ, our πάσχα has been sacrificed.” Participation in the Passover meal required a paschal sacrifice, and this sacrifice served as an identity marker of those who experienced divine salvation. On the night in which the angel passed over the houses of Egypt, the blood of the sacrificed lamb upon the doorpost signified all who were part of Israel. This identity marker assured the salvation of Israel’s firstborn and, on the converse, the destruction of the “outsiders,” those not marked by the blood of the sacrifice. In a similar way, Paul makes Christ the identity marker of the church.62 Paul employs the passive verb ἐτύθη, indicating that Christ has already been sacrificed. This is not an act accomplished by the Corinthians, but by God. Through Christ, even the Gentile Corinthians are participants at the table.63 As 1 Cor 1:30 indicates, God is the source of their life in Christ. Since Christ, “our πάσχα,” has been slain, the church is essentially behind in their preparations. The time is at hand to remove the leaven.64 Of course, for the traditional Jewish Passover, the leaven would have been removed well before the sacrifice, but Paul’s adaptation of the tradition, with the sacrifice having already occurred, heightens the urgency with which the Corinthians must purge their contaminant. For Paul, it is Christ who enables the Corinthians to partake of the feast, but like their Israelite ancestors, they must partake while being “unleavened.” With the link of the Feast of Unleavened Bread and the Passover,65 there is a connection between the sacrifice and purity. Josephus believed that the sacri-

62

So also Hays, 1 Corinthians, 83. The significance of this inclusion will be discussed in the next section. 64 Hays, 1 Corinthians, 83; Barrett, 1 Corinthians, 128. 65 See Exod 12:1–20, 40–51; Num 9:1–14, 28:16–25; Lev 23:5–8; Deut 16:1–11; Josephus, B.J. 2.8,10 and A.J. 2.313; 3.248–49; 9.271; 11.109; 14.21; 18.29; Luke 22:1. In later Judaism the Passover, commemorated on the night of the 14th–15th Nisan, was combined with the Feast of Unleavened Bread, observed from the 15th to the 21st of Nisan, and this week-long celebration was commonly referred to as the Passover. J. Jeremias, “πάσχα” TDNT 5:898. See Deut 16:1–11 where the Passover and unleavened bread festivals are jointly celebrated and Exod 12:14 concerning the relationship between these festivals. Josephus uses the term “Passover” to include the Feast of Unleavened Bread in B.J. 2.8,10 and A.J. 3.248-251; 14.21; 18.29. See also Luke 22:1. For the difficulties of determining how these distinct feasts came to be celebrated together see Jan A. Wagenaar, “Passover and the First Day of the Festival of Unleavened Bread in the Priestly Festival Calendar,” VT 54 (April 2004): 250–268; Tamara Prosic, “Origin of Passover,” Scandanavian Journal of the Old Testament 13 (June 1999): 78–95. 63

140

Chapter 4: Be As You Really Are

ficial blood itself had purifying power.66 He was not the first to make this connection.67 In Ezekiel 45:21–25, for instance, the sacrifice is linked to the atonement of the people.68 Paul simply says that the πάσχα has been sacrificed (ἐτύθη). His language in 5:7 is reminiscent of the language of sacrifice in Exodus 12:21, since both texts use forms of θύω. In 6:11, Paul declares that the believers were washed, sanctified, and justified, and in 6:20 he declares that their bodies were purchased with a price. Paul, however, does not explain how the sacrifice works.69 The point is that the sacrifice has already been offered, and due to the actions of God in providing this sacrifice, the Corinthians need to prepare for the feast. They must clean out the old leaven (5:7a). 2. A Paschal People Knowing the significance of the paschal festival heightens the urgency of Paul’s message in 1 Corinthians 5. The Passover celebration embodies Israel’s identity as God’s chosen people. Each year, according to scripture, the Jewish people were to commemorate God’s redemptive actions toward their ancestors by observing paschal rites and reciting the story of the exodus to their children. Exodus 12:26–27 recounts the practice: “And when your children say to you, ‘What does this rite mean to you?’ You shall say, ‘It is a Passover sacrifice to the Lord who passed over the houses of the sons of Israel in Egypt when he smote the Egyptians, but spared our homes.’ And the people bowed low and worshiped.”70 This text highlights an important feature of paschal observance: remembrance. Remembering that the Lord is the one who is responsible for the Israelites’ deliverance is central to this rite. The Lord rescued the Hebrews from the hands of Pharaoh and led the people into an unknown, but promised future. As later generations recall and observe the πάσχα, they associate themselves with their ancestors as people who have been chosen by this same God, and they acknowledge God’s power to save

66

Josephus, A.J. 2.311-313; 11.110. Consider also John 1:29: “Behold the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!” 67 Much has been written about this topic. For excellent surveys of the interplay between purity and religious practices, see Paolo Sacchi, The History of the Second Temple Period, JSOTSup 285 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000), 439–476; regarding sacrifice in particular, E. P. Sanders, Judaism: Practice and Belief 63 BCE–66 CE (London: SCM Press, 1992), 103–118. 68 Cf. Lev. 17:11–13. 69 Paul uses language associated with redemption in 6:19–20 (ἀγοράζω). Furthermore, the language of 6:11 suggests that the Corinthians’ purification, justification, and sanctification are all connected to Christ. Certainly, the word of the cross is central to Paul’s instructions in this letter. Paul, however, does not provide here a theology of atonement. 70 See also Exod 13:14–16.

B. 1 Corinthians 5:6-8: Be As You Really Are

141

his people in the past as well as to protect and provide for his people in the future. Through the annual celebration of their ancestors’ exodus, later generations not only recall the Lord’s actions, but also reenact Israel’s salvation from slavery through the blood of sacrifice and through sharing a special meal. Exodus 34:25 specifies that the blood of the sacrifice should not be offered with leaven;71 rather, the roasted sacrifice should be consumed with unleavened bread and bitter herbs since they are to eat it as though ready to leave in a moment’s notice (Exod 12:8–11). The Feast of Unleavened Bread, though a distinct feast, came to be celebrated alongside the Passover.72 In Exod 12:14–20, the festival of Unleavened Bread is portrayed as a continuation of the Passover: “You shall observe the festival of unleavened bread, for on this very day I brought your companies out of the land of Egypt: you shall observe this day throughout your generations as a perpetual ordinance” (Exod 12:17). The effect of this merger gave to the paschal celebration a heightened focus on the purity of the people as a whole and on their distinctiveness among the nations. In the festival regulations of Ezek 45:18–25, the paschal sacrifice is associated with a sin offering making atonement for the people.73 Likewise, in 1 Esdras 7:11–15 those who returned from captivity celebrated the Passover in order to separate themselves from the abominations of the peoples of the land. They were concerned to demonstrate purity even though not all the captives were yet considered ritually clean. Similarly, Josephus interprets the blood of the sacrifice as a purifying agent for the houses of Israel: “Then, when the fourteenth day was come the whole body, in readiness to start, sacrificed, purified the houses with the blood, using bunches of hyssop to sprinkle it” (A.J. 2.312).74 In some rehearsals of the exodus story and celebrations of Passover, therefore, the act of purification became an integral part of setting Israel apart from her neighbors.75 The rites of purification, associated with the rites of Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread, distinguished the participants as a people who honored a holy Lord. As previously noted, in the New Testament writings the paschal tradition may have informed the link between the death of the lamb and the ransom

71

See also Deut 16:1–8. See note 64. 73 So also Josephus, A.J. 3.249. 74 See also A.J. 3.249; 10.70. In A.J. 9.260–276, Josephus arranges the events of the festival so that all Israel is present at the feast and at the time of expiation (unlike the order in 2 Chron 29–30, especially 29:20–36). Colautti argues that this fits with Josephus’s insistence that purity is indispensable to the celebration of Passover (Frederico M. Colautti, Passover in the Works of Josephus [Leiden: Brill, 2002], 54). 75 Cf. 2 Kgs 22–23 where purification is not mentioned. 72

142

Chapter 4: Be As You Really Are

from sin. The Gospel of John presents Jesus as the lamb who takes away the sins of the world (1:29), and the author situates Jesus’ death at the same time as the paschal sacrifice (John 19:14–16).76 Similarly, in 1 Pet 1:18–19 the author equates the ransom of the people with “the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot” (1:19). The blood of this lamb is the basis of the people’s holiness and the rationale for the author’s exhortation to holiness: “As obedient children, do not be conformed to the passions of your former ignorance, but as he who called you is holy, be holy yourselves in all your conduct; since it is written ‘You shall be holy, for I am holy’” (1 Peter 1:14–17). With the citation of Lev 11:44 (“You shall be holy, for I am holy”), God’s holiness demands the holiness of the people because God has “ransomed” them through the blood of Christ (1 Peter 1:18–19). In 1 Peter, being a people who belong to a holy God entails being a holy people, and in both 1 Peter 1:18–19 and John 1:29 the ransom of sin occurs through the blood of Jesus. Though the Gospel of John goes to greater lengths than 1 Peter to associate Christ’s death with the Passover, these New Testament authors are important witnesses to the tendency to associate purity with the blood of the lamb. For 1 Peter, this connection undergirds the command for holiness. As will be shown in 1 Cor 5:6–8, the paschal tradition drives Paul’s admonition to “be a new lump, as you really are unleavened” (5:7a). The observance of Passover distinguished those who trusted in the Lord from those who trusted in the gods of Egypt. In Exodus 12, the blood itself was a sign of the Israelites’ trust in the Lord: This is how you shall eat it: your loins girded, your sandals on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and you shall eat it hurriedly. It is the Passover of the Lord. For I will pass through the land of Egypt that night, and I will strike down every firstborn in the land of Egypt, both human beings and animals; on all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgments: I am the Lord. The blood shall be a sign for you on the houses where you live: when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and no plague shall destroy you when I strike the land of Egypt. This day shall be a day of remembrance for you. You shall celebrate it as a festival to the Lord; throughout your generations you shall observe it as a perpetual ordinance. (Exod 12:11–14)

The blood was a sign for the destroyer to pass over and to preserve life as well as a marker to identify those who were protected by the sacrifice. All Israel was to observe God’s ordinance as a memorial to the Lord, and there were consequences for those who disregarded the rite: “For seven days no leaven shall be found in your houses; for whoever eats what is leavened shall be cut off from the congregation of Israel, whether an alien or a native of the land” (Exod 12:20).77 Neglecting the ordinance carried the severe penalty of

76 77

See also the paschal purity concerns of John 11:55; 18:28. See also Exod 12:15.

B. 1 Corinthians 5:6-8: Be As You Really Are

143

excommunication.78 This may seem like a harsh rule, but the Passover itself was an identity marker. Those who observed it were reminded of God’s redemptive actions for their ancestors and were bearing witness to the continued power of this God. In Deut 16:2–3, eating unleavened bread is connected to remembering the affliction of the ancestors and their divine deliverance: You shall offer the passover sacrifice to the Lord your God, from the flock and the herd, at the place that the Lord will choose as a dwelling for his name. You must not eat with it anything leavened. For seven days you shall eat unleavened bread with it – the bread of affliction – because you came out of the land of Egypt in great haste, so that all the days of your life you may remember the day of your departure from the land of Egypt.

The theme of remembrance and thanksgiving is present in Josephus’s accounts of Passover as well. In A.J. 11.110 Josephus says that the Israelites “offered sacrifices of thanksgiving because the divine will had brought them again to the land of their Fathers and to the laws of this land.”79 In A.J. 3.250, Josephus claims that the act of Passover gives glory to God, and in A.J. 17.213 the custom is not only a “memorial of their departure from Egypt” but the very “worship of God.” By annually removing the leaven from their homes, selecting a spotless sacrifice, partaking of the feast, and recalling these events to future generations, the people of the Lord were distinguished from all tribes and nations. The pilgrimage festival of Passover was a time that reinforced bonds among the Israelites and reminded every Israelite of God’s acts of salvation.80 Celebrating the feast also had the effect of creating solidarity with the generation whom God led out of Egypt. In A.J. 3.248, for instance, Josephus places himself among the Israelites who fled slavery by speaking of the event with the first person plural pronoun: “we offered then on departure from Egypt the sacrifice called Passover.”81 Conversely, failing to remember the Lord’s actions jeopardized Israel’s identity as God’s people and caused them to look like their idolatrous neighbors. Those who removed the leaven, though, were doing more than removing an agent that caused the bread dough to rise. They were engaging in an act of purification, where the leaven itself represented their own impurities before God. This is why writers like Josephus could consider the sacrificial blood a purifying agent and paschal observance an act 78

This was the scriptural ideal. We do not know what was actually practiced. Consider, for example, 2 Chron 30:16–20 where Hezekiah prays for the Lord to pardon those who have partaken of the Passover while being ceremonially unclean, and God pardons them. Hezekiah describes the partakers as those whose hearts seek the Lord because they have already shown their allegiance to the Lord by coming to the city and by breaking the cycle of infidelity begun by their ancestors. 79 See also A.J. 11.66. 80 Colautti, Passover in the Works of Josephus, 81–82. 81 See also A.J. 2.313; 9.264.

144

Chapter 4: Be As You Really Are

of purification (A.J. 2.312; 3.294; 10.70; 11.110). Paschal observance marked Israel as a holy people chosen by God, and the perpetual performance of these rites continued to distinguish the Jews as a distinct people called to bear witness to the power of the Lord to the nations. III. 1 Corinthians 5:8: Let Us Feast In verse 8, the addition of “therefore” indicates that, for Paul, Christ’s sacrifice enables both Jew and Gentile to join in the feast formerly open to Jews only:82 “Let us, therefore, celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of purity and truth” (5:8). Paul does not clarify how Christ is the πάσχα for both Jews and Greeks. Nor does he bother to explicate the significance of the sacrifice having already occurred. He simply sets up the sacrifice as the basis for their invitation to feast. By feasting, they are enacting and celebrating their transformation into the “new” people. The verb that Paul employs in verse 8 involves more than the one-time act of eating. The word ἑορτάζω instead reflects the celebration of a festival.83 Celebrating a festival for a holy day is not necessarily a one-time experience, but a recurring event. Of course, the Passover itself is an annual tradition, but Paul is not inviting the church to feast on the traditional paschal meal. Paul has reinterpreted the elements of this recurring festival. Paul sets up a contrast between the old leaven and the unleavened bread of purity and truth. The contrast between the old leaven, equated with κακία and πονηρία, and the unleavened bread of purity and truth is a significant one. For the apostle, κακία and πονηρία are markers of the old age. In Gal 1:4, he employs the adjective πονηρός to describe the present evil age, and in 1 Thess 5:22 he warns the beloved community to abstain from every form of evil.84 In Rom 12:9 he will charge the believers to hate what is evil (πονηρός) and cling to what is good. Paul consistently uses “evil” to categorize things or persons that are hostile to God. In Rom 1:29–30, Paul employs κακία and πονηρία in a long list of vices that depicts those with a base mind, who know God’s decree but who engage in evil anyway. Not only do these people practice κακία and πονηρία, but they encourage others to do the same. Likewise, 82

As will be discussed in the next section. Interestingly, 1 Cor 5:8 is the only place where Paul employs ἑορτάζω. The term itself indicates more than eating, but the celebration of a festival. In Mos. 2.24, Philo uses this word to refer to the celebration of a holy day after fasting. With reference to the use of ἑορτάζω to refer to religious festivals in general, see Philo, Spec. 2.70; Herodotus, Hist. 2.122; for a festival with sacrifices, see Herodotus, Hist. 2.60. Josephus even uses this term to refer to celebrating the festival of Agrippa’s birthday A.J. 19.321. 84 See also Eph 5:16; 6:12–13, 16; Col 1:21; 2 Thess 3:2, 3; 1 Tim 6:4; 2 Tim 3:13; 4:18. 83

B. 1 Corinthians 5:6-8: Be As You Really Are

145

in 1 Cor 14:20 Paul exhorts the believers to “be babes in κακία but in thinking be mature.” In 1 Cor 5:8, the apostle urges the church to leave κακία and πονηρία and to be who they really are in Christ. To continue to feast on the leavened bread of κακία and πονηρία would be to continue in the behavior that is not indicative of life in the Spirit.85 Not only does Paul’s invitation to celebrate the feast require the participants to cleanse out leaven to reflect their pure state, but part of the celebration involves feasting on the unleavened bread of “purity” and “truth” (5:8). The word that Paul employs for purity εἰλικρίνεια is often translated as “sincerity.” Paul uses this word in 2 Cor 2:17 to describe his own motives, and in 2 Cor 1:12 it is coupled with ἁπλότης, a term that connotes singleness of mind. Furthermore, in 2 Cor 1:12 εἰλικρίνεια is modified by τοῦ θεοῦ, indicating that this purity is associated with God. In both instances in 2 Corinthians, the word is used to describe the holy singularity of Paul’s intentions.86 Given this background, understanding the word as unmixed or pure fits well with his command to remove the sinful man from their midst. Paul’s appeal to εἰλικρίνεια in verse 8 is coupled with ἀλήθεια. Paul’s intentions are not unrelated to the idea of “truth.” In Rom 9:1, Paul refers to the sincerity of his motives because he whole-heartedly affirms the truthfulness of his message: “I am speaking the truth in Christ – I am not lying; my conscience confirms it by the Holy Spirit.”87 Paul regards his message as the “truth of the gospel” (Gal 2:5, 14). 88 Interestingly, a reference to truth also comes in the context of leaven imagery in Gal 5:9. In Gal 5:7, Paul equates the truth with the purity of his God-given message: “You were running well. Who prevented you from obeying the truth?” 89 Indeed, the truth has power of its own. The apostle speaks of the truth as having power over his mission in 2 Cor 3:8 and encourages the believers to be guided by what is true (ἀληθής) in Phil 4:9: “Finally, beloved, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is pleasing, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence and if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.” Truth is a marker of a life devoted to a true God. Feasting on truth is to celebrate continually the truthfulness of God’s good news.

85

See also Eph 4:31; Col 3:8; Tit 3:3. This sense of purity is consistent with earlier non-Pauline uses of the word to describe a pure substance or something unmixed. For example, Posidonius, Fragmenta 400b, Sext. Emp. 9.71–74; Aristoteles, De Coloribus 793a. 87 Cf. 2 Cor 11:10; 13:8. 88 Gal 2:5, 14; 5:7; Rom 1:25; 3:7; 15:8; 2 Cor 11:10. Cf. 1 Thess 1:9 a “true (ἀληθινός) God.” Not unlike Paul’s advice to the Philippians in Phil 4:8–9. 89 Rom 9:1; Gal 2:14; 5:7; 2 Cor 11:10; 13:8. 86

146

Chapter 4: Be As You Really Are

The celebration of the festival serves as more than an illustration in Paul’s arguments. By performing the ritual of feasting on “unleavened bread of purity and truth,” the Corinthians are enacting their transformation by God’s Spirit into “a new lump.” For Paul, it is because Christ’s blood is the new identity marker that both Jew and Gentile partake of a feast that commemorates God’s acts of salvation. In light of Christ’s sacrifice, Paul adopts and adapts Israel’s foundational exodus traditions. He transforms these traditions to speak to a people who have been called to leave behind their “Gentile” identity (1 Cor 5:1; 12:1) and to become a “new lump” (1 Cor 5:7). The invitation to feast encourages them to commemorate their salvation. Just as Israel prepared for the Feasts of Unleavened Bread and Passover, so the Corinthians are to remove the leaven from their midst. Partaking in this ritual recalls the Corinthians’ exodus from their identity as a people who followed idols and their entrance into a new identity as a church who enjoys a new status in Christ. Feasting on the one bread of purity and truth is a means for them to be who they really are as members of Christ. 1. “Not Even Among the Gentiles:” The Significance of the Invitation Paul invites the Corinthians to celebrate a transformed paschal festival, and the significance of this invitation should not be overlooked. For those familiar with the Passover tradition, this invitation raises a red flag. According to Exod 12:43, foreigners and those uncircumcised were strictly forbidden from participating in this meal.90 Josephus’ portrayal of the Passover provides evidence that this rule was still practiced by some in the first century (B.J. 6.420). Paul, however, employs two distinctive features to invite Gentiles to participate in a strictly Jewish festival. First, in 1 Cor 5:7, Paul includes the first person plural pronoun to refer to Christ as “our πάσχα.” This same tool for incorporation is seen in 10:1 when he refers to the ancient Israelites as “our ancestors.” Second, Paul enjoins the whole church to celebrate the paschal festival in 5:8. The apostle’s explicit inclusion of his entire audience – both Jew and Gentile – into the reference of “our πάσχα” and his open dinner invitation envelop a group of people who were formerly forbidden from participating in the Jewish festival. Is Paul breaking a sacred tradition by enjoining these former outsiders to participate in an insider-only ritual? Who does Paul consider the Corinthians to be? Before investigating the significance of the Gentile Corinthians’ inclusion, it is necessary to note whether or not the Corinthians would have been familiar with the paschal tradition enough to grasp the import of Paul’s invitation. Then, we will examine ways in which Paul alters the invitation in light of the Corinthians’ situation. 90 So also Exod 12:48; Cf. Num 9:1–14, which allows aliens to participate on the grounds that they follow all the instructions for purity and sacrifice given to Israel.

B. 1 Corinthians 5:6-8: Be As You Really Are

147

2. The Corinthians and Passover Would Paul’s invitation to feast have been surprising to the Gentile Corinthians? Answering this question requires some speculation as to what the Corinthians may have known about paschal traditions. Paul may be employing an early interpretation of Christ’s death as a paschal sacrifice. Given the propensity of New Testament writers to correlate Christ and the image of a sacrificial lamb,91 linking Jesus to paschal imagery may have been a tradition already alive in the early churches by the time of Paul’s writing of 1 Corinthians. The later Gospel writers will situate Christ’s death with the timing of Passover, and John’s Gospel will equate the crucifixion of Jesus with the paschal sacrifice. Even if Paul is alluding to a preformed tradition, however, the Corinthians are not necessarily aware of the correlation between Jesus’ death and the festival of Passover. The lack of any explanation of this tradition, however, suggests that Paul assumes some familiarity with Israel’s Passover. It is possible that Paul’s invitation to feast may have found precedent in the practices of other early churches. There is evidence that some in the early church maintained the observance of the Passover during the apostolic period and even beyond. In Eusebius’ Hist. eccl. 5.24.16, Polycarp is said to observe the πάσχα because he had always done so in company with “John the disciple of our Lord and the other apostles with whom he had associated.” 92 This reference to Polycarp occurs in a dialogue with Anicetus who refuses to observe the Passover and instead urges Polycarp to observe the eucharist. Although Eusebius does not explicitly state that Polycarp has partaken of a paschal meal, the text implies it.93 For the early believers who continued some type of Passover observance, Joachim Jeremias plausibly suggests that these paschal celebrations would have memorialized God’s acts of salvation and would have looked forward to future deliverance just as traditional Passover

91

The image of Christ as the lamb proved to be a potent symbol for the writers of the early church (1 Cor 5:7; 1 Pet 1:19; John 1:29, 36; cf. Rev 5:6, 9, 12; 12:11). 92 Eusebius records this in light of the debate over when to celebrate the “Savior’s Passover.” Note, for instance, the work of Melito of Sardis (Peri Pascha) and the Quartodecimans controversy. For a discussion of the controversy and Melito’s work see Alistair Stewart-Sykes, The Lamb’s High Feast: Melito, Peri Pascha and the Quartodeciman Paschal Liturgy at Sardis (London: Brill, 1998); cf. Lynn H. Cohick, The Peri Pascha Attributed to Melito of Sardis: Setting, Purpose, and Sources (Providence: Brown Judaic Studies, 2000). 93 See Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 5.24.2–7, 16. Other evidence suggests that this Passover observance was altered from a πάσχα meal to a Passover vigil for the Jews.

148

Chapter 4: Be As You Really Are

celebrations.94 For Jesus’ followers, however, that future hope was linked with the parousia.95 It is difficult to ascertain, however, whether the celebration of the Passover might have occurred in the Jewish Diaspora at the time that Paul penned this letter to the Corinthians. According to Jeremias, before the destruction of the Second Temple, the Passover was still expected to be celebrated at the temple.96 Likewise, Baruch Bokser describes the Passover during this period as a “pilgrimage festival celebrating the national redemption from Egypt as a national day of independence.”97 Yet, as evidenced from the Samaritan communities, not all Jewish groups celebrated the Passover in Jerusalem.98 Furthermore, a papyrus letter dated to the year 419 B.C.E. from Elephantine refers to the celebration of two festivals, one occurring on the 14th day of the month and the second from the 15th to the 21st. This reference may provide evidence of the celebration of the Passover in the Egyptian Jewish temple, but the letter is unclear about what is actually performed on these dates.99 Although it may serve as evidence that some Jewish communities did not strictly follow Josiah’s reforms, the letter’s evidence is not conclusive. Bokser claims that even those who were too poor to offer a sacrifice might have observed the Feast of Unleavened Bread, but any special commemoration of the Passover without a paschal sacrifice offered at Jerusalem after Josiah’s reform and before the destruction of the Second Temple was not technically a paschal meal.100 Rather, according to Bokser, Jews could still have recounted the exodus, instructed their children, passed on the traditions, and faithfully observed the Feast of Unleavened Bread without sacrificing the paschal lamb.101 94

Jeremias, TDNT, 902–3. For a discussion of the eschatological expectations of the Quartodecimans, for example, see Stewart-Sykes, The Lamb’s High Feast, 182–185. Cf. Baruch M. Bokser, The Origins of the Seder: The Passover Rite and Early Rabbinic Judaism (Berkeley: University of California, 1984), 74–78. 95 Jeremias, TDNT, 903. 96 Joachim Jeremias, Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus: An Investigation into Economic and Social Conditions during the New Testament Period, trans. F. H. and C. H. Cave (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969), 101–2. 97 Baruch Bokser, “Ritualizing the Seder,” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 56 (1988): 443–472, esp. 443. See Deut 16:1–8; 1 Esdras 1:1; cf, Luke 2:41; Josephus, A. J. 10:70–71. 98 B. M. Bokser, “Unleavened Bread and Passover, Feasts of,” Anchor Bible Dictionary 6:754–65, 761. 99 Bokser, “Unleavened Bread and Passover, Feasts of,” 759. 100 For specific earlier πάσχα instructions see Num 9:1–14; Lev 23:4-8; Deut 16:1–8; Ezek 45:21–25. 101 Bokser, “Unleavened Bread and Passover, Feasts of,” 762–63. There is disagreement, however, as to whether the Jews sacrificed Passover outside Jerusalem. See Sanders, Judaism, 130–133; cf. Philo, Spec. 2.145–149.

B. 1 Corinthians 5:6-8: Be As You Really Are

149

Whether or not Paul’s churches, and particularly the church at Corinth, normally participated in the yearly Passover feast or the Feast of Unleavened Bread cannot be conclusively determined.102 Though the exodus is a foundational tradition for Israel, Paul is not writing to a church full of Jewish believers. To be sure, the possibility of a small number of Jewish believers in this congregation cannot be ruled out. Although most of the evidence of a Jewish presence at Corinth comes from Acts and therefore needs to be read critically, Paul includes both Jew and Greek in his arguments within 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 1:22, 23, 24; 9:20; 10:32; 12:13). While these references could simply be rhetorical, Paul claims in 9:20 that his larger ministry has included Jews. Furthermore, the letter’s co-sender, Sosthenes, a Jewish name, may be the ruler of the synagogue whom Luke mentions in Acts 18:17, and Crispus, whom Paul mentions in 1 Cor 1:14, may be the synagogue ruler of Acts 18:8. The presence of a small number of Jewish believers in the Corinthian congregation, therefore, is plausible, even though the majority of the letter addresses the congregation as though they are all Gentiles (e.g. 1 Cor 12:2). It is possible that Jews throughout the Diaspora migrated to Jerusalem to celebrate the feast when feasible,103 but even those who chose to celebrate the festival at home would have had some daily contact with their non-Jewish neighbors. Since direct evidence for paschal observance in Corinth is lacking, we can only speculate as to Jewish paschal practices at the time of Paul. Even if some in the Corinthian church have never celebrated the Passover, Paul expects the church to understand his reference to πάσχα. Paul’s appeal to the Passover in 1 Cor 5:6–8 lacks any rehearsal of the narrative traditions and fails to explain what the term means. The imagery of leaven in verse 7 and unleavened bread in verse 8 are the only clues pointing to the festival. The term πάσχα was only employed in reference to the Jewish Passover. In the New Testament πάσχα refers to the Passover meal (Mark 14:1) and to the entire Jewish festival.104 The term also commonly implies the sacrifice itself, as it does in 1 Cor 5:7.105 Paul could be mistaken about how much of Israel’s scripture the Corinthians knew. It is arguable whether they would have needed familiarity with the sacred texts to understand this allusion, especially if there was some general, albeit limited, knowledge of Jewish paschal traditions beyond Jewish communities in the Diaspora. It is interesting to note that even Christopher Stan102

See Meeks, 163. Jeremias, 898. Jesus’ family and Jesus himself observed it as a pilgrimage festival to Jerusalem, Luke 2:41; 22:1–13; Matt 26:1–5, 14–19; Mark 14:1–2, 10–16; Josephus, A. J. 10:70–71. 104 See Matt 26:2; Luke 2:41; 22:1; John 2:13, 23; 6:4; 11:55; 12:1; 13:1; 18:39; 19:14; Acts 12:4. 105 Cf. Mark 14:12; Luke 22:7. 103

150

Chapter 4: Be As You Really Are

ley, who has exercised great caution in assuming the Pauline audience’s familiarity or reverence for Israel’s texts, has made allowance for some broad knowledge of central stories like the exodus traditions concerning the giving of the Ten Commandments or traditions about the life of Moses.106 If the Corinthians lacked any knowledge whatsoever of the Passover, then it is difficult to imagine that Paul’s admonition would have been effectively communicated. In fact, it would be rather odd, indeed, for Paul to use a wholly unfamiliar image in a section where the apostle is also clarifying what he wrote in a previous letter (5:9). He must have believed that the Corinthians would have grasped the paschal imagery – even if there would be varying levels of understanding among the predominantly Gentile believers. Given what little information is available for determining whether the early churches were continuing to observe Passover, it is impossible to deny any knowledge of paschal traditions, especially since the New Testament bears witness to an early link between Jesus’ death and the πάσχα. Paul’s churches may have only been familiar with the paschal traditions that had been handed down in the life of the churches, but they may also have had some association with Corinthian Jews who observed this Jewish feast (perhaps, Sosthenes or Crispus). There may also have been proselytes or God-fearers in the church who had heard Israel’s scriptures in the synagogue. The fact that Paul does not grant any explanation for his use of the term πάσχα suggests that some, if not most, of his audience would have at least been somewhat familiar with Israel’s paschal traditions. It is quite likely that Paul appeals to this tradition because he himself has given some instruction in Israel’s scripture to the Gentiles during his time with them. After all, he assumes that the Corinthians view scripture with some level of authority when he claims in 1 Cor 10:11 that Israel’s sacred texts were “written down for our instruction.” Whatever level of knowledge the Corinthians may have had concerning paschal observance, Paul uses Christ as πάσχα to urge the Corinthians to action. 3. Paul’s Treatment of the Paschal Tradition In 1 Cor 5:6–8, Jewish paschal practices have been reinterpreted in light of the cross. In 1 Cor 5:7, Paul declares that Christ “our πάσχα has been slain.” Already the blood of the paschal sacrifice has been attributed to Christ’s blood, whether by Paul or by earlier church tradition. Likewise, in 5:8, Paul bids the believers to feast with him, but the elements of the feast have been altered. For Paul, the paschal lamb has been sacrificed in Jerusalem, not by the festival participants, but by God. Furthermore, the “feast” imagery of 5:8 has been transformed from the traditional unleavened bread and slain lamb to 106 C. Stanley, “Pearls Before Swine”: Did Paul’s Audiences Understand his Biblical Quotations?” NovT 41 (1999): 134.

C. 1 Corinthians 5:9-13: Drive Out the Wicked Person

151

the “unleavened bread of purity and truth.” Paul’s transformation of the Passover tradition in 1 Corinthians 5 to include the sacrificed Christ and to incorporate Gentiles as guests at the feast demonstrates the apostle’s response to the crisis of the cross. During a time of crisis, there are three possible responses to tradition: abandonment of the tradition, fidelity to the unchanged tradition, or transformation of the tradition.107 Paul transforms the ancient paschal tradition to meet the challenges posed by his new historical situation. In his allusion to the Passover in 1 Cor 5:6–8, Paul does not condone a break with Israel’s traditions, but rather effects a transformation of them. The apostle does not cling to his own sacred scriptures without reinterpreting them. Rather, Paul’s own encounter with the revelation of Christ forces the apostle to interpret and reinterpret scripture again and again.108 As he does in 1 Cor 10:1–22, Paul reinterprets Israel’s tradition in light of the Christ event, and he uses this reading as a tool for including the former outsiders. Paul’s invitation for all to feast in 5:8 is an adaptation of paschal tradition in light of “our πάσχα” (5:7b). In Paul’s argument, it is Christ who makes it possible for all to feast (1:30; 6:19–20; 11:23–25). Likewise, instead of feasting on literal unleavened bread, Paul charges them to be who they really are, “unleavened,” and to feast on the metaphorical bread of purity and truth (5:8). Paul assumes an integral relationship between the requirements of the festival – the removal of leaven – and the change wrought by feasting on purity and truth. The employment of this adapted paschal tradition suggests a curious inclusion of “outsiders” and a conviction that the church stands in a perilous position by jeopardizing its purity as God’s people. The inclusion of the Gentiles in light of Christ’s sacrifice grounds the church’s identity in a foundational story of God’s actions in choosing a people and challenges the believers to be the saints they are called to be.

C. 1 Corinthians 5:9-13: Drive Out the Wicked Person C. 1 Corinthians 5:9-13: Drive Out the Wicked Person

The instructions in 5:9–13 reiterate the church’s corporate responsibility to maintain the purity of their community. Immediately after the invitation to feast on the unleavened bread of purity and truth in 5:8, Paul clarifies the meaning of his previous instruction not to associate with immoral people. Perhaps he had this particular sexual offense in mind when he originally

107

Keesmaat, 20. For more on Paul’s ongoing hermeneutical strategy in 1 Corinthians see Margaret M. Mitchell, Paul, the Corinthians and the Birth of Christian Hermeneutics (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 2010). 108

152

Chapter 4: Be As You Really Are

wrote the command.109 In the context of 5:1–13, the πόρνος is the leaven that must be removed from the community. The church evidently did not understand Paul’s previous instruction regarding πόρνοι within the community, but considered Paul’s advice to be a warning about πόρνοι “of this world” (5:10). In 5:11, Paul urges the Corinthians to abstain from eating with someone who is a πόρνος. Surely, this man, who is guilty of engaging in πορνεία not even found among the nations (5:1), prompts this reference. As Bruce Winter points out, the development of social networks was central to Roman society. Since dinner invitations were a means of forging friendships and sustaining societas, the invitation was in itself a form of endorsement of the man and his behavior.110 Paul instead commands the church in verse 11 “not even to eat with such a one.” Associating with someone within their own community who is engaged in behavior that is considered detestable might give others the impression that the church approves of incest.111 According to the reasoning of 5:1, since this type of behavior is not even approved among the nations, the church looks even more detestable by continuing to socialize with this man. Apparently the man has yet to experience any form of correction or admonition and even enjoys continued social relationships with members of the congregation. Paul makes it clear that it is the church’s responsibility to rebuke this behavior, but it is not the community’s place to reprove those outside the community. God will judge the world. Judging outsiders is exactly what God is depicted as doing on the night that the death angel passed over the houses of Israel and brought destruction to the homes of the Egyptians. Since God judges those outside, it is not the role of the church to pass judgment on the world.112 Instead, they are to be concerned with the community’s holiness and help one another race toward the prize of the imperishable wreath (9:24– 27). Paul insists that the Corinthians judge one another (5:12) to ensure that the community honors the holy God. This discussion of judging one another leads naturally to Paul’s discussion in 6:1–11 regarding brothers and sisters within the community who are suing one another in the courts of outsiders.113 Paul calls the believers to suffer wrong rather than to battle one another in the civil courts (6:7–8). All those who defraud one another or who are commit109

See South, “A Critique of ‘Curse/Death’ in 1 Cor 5.1–8,” 554. Winter, After Paul Left Corinth, 56. 111 Cf. Rom 1:32. 112 Consider 1 Cor 3:13–15; 2 Cor 5:10. 113 Zaas, “‘Cast Out the Evil Man from Your Midst” (1 Cor 5:13b),” 259. Cf. Deming who argues that some in the community, who want the man punished, take him to court and lose their case (“The Unity of 1 Corinthians 5–6,” 294). If 6:1–11 refers to the church’s case against the man, Paul makes no acknowledgement of efforts to reprove the man in 5:9–13, where he chastises the church for failing to act. 110

C. 1 Corinthians 5:9-13: Drive Out the Wicked Person

153

ting πορνεία are lumped into Paul’s larger label ἄδικοι in 6:9. The ἄδικοι will not inherit the kingdom of God (6:9, 10). The general warning incites a list of vices, and at the top of the list are the πόρνοι (both in 6:9 and in 5:10 and 11).114 In 5:13, Paul reiterates what he has already instructed in verse 2, “Drive out the wicked person from among you.” This quotation comes from Deuteronomy, but the exact verse is uncertain. The Nestle Aland marginal note opts for Deut 17:7, but the phrase occurs on six occasions to signal the execution of law offenders: Deut 13:5; 17:7; 19:19; 21:21; 22:21; and 24:7.115 Furthermore, Paul follows the Septuagint’s reading of Deut 17:7, but changes the future indicative of the verb to an aorist imperative. The effect of this change renders the Deuteronomistic command as a word spoken directly to the Corinthians.116 According to Deuteronomy 22, one of the six situations demanding the death penalty is adultery (Deut 22:22, 24), and specifically forbidden is a man’s relationship with his father’s wife (23:1).117 With each citation of the death penalty in Deuteronomy, what is also highlighted is Israel’s corporate responsibility to be holy.118 In Deut 17:7 the expulsion from the community takes place because a person has “violated the covenant.” Deuteronomy 19:19b–20 proposes that the expulsion of the sinner will dissuade others from emulating the sin (so also Deut 13:12–18; 17:2–7; 12–13; 21:18–21).119 Brian Rosner argues that the commands in Deuteronomy inform Paul’s concern for the community. A breach of the covenant, guilt by association, and the maintenance of holiness are major reasons in Deuteronomy for expulsion from the community.120 In Paul’s argument in 1 Corinthians 5, the community’s toleration of the man’s behavior has tainted the whole church, and Paul calls the community to maintain their God-given purity by striving to be holy. Beyond Deuteronomy, Rosner’s thesis draws from a number of other biblical passages that demonstrate Israel’s corporate responsibility to maintain its covenant relationship with the Lord and its distinctiveness as a holy people. After tracing the importance of corporate responsibility in Israel’s scriptures he argues, “In the corporate responsibility motif certain offenders must be removed because, while they remain, the nation is implicated in their sin,

114

Interestingly, the εἰδωλολάτραι are listed second. This is another link between Paul’s arguments in chapters 5–6 and his warnings in 8:1–11:1. 115 Cf. Judg 20:13. Brian S. Rosner, Paul, Scripture and Ethics: A Study of 1 Corinthians 5–7 (Leiden: Brill, 1994), 63. 116 Hays, 1 Corinthians, 88. 117 Hays, “Conversion,” 410. 118 Rosner, Paul, Scripture and Ethics, 63. 119 Rosner, Paul, Scripture and Ethics, 65. 120 Rosner, Paul, Scripture and Ethics, 68.

154

Chapter 4: Be As You Really Are

and it seems, impending punishment.”121 A key point in Rosner’s argument is the word πενθέω in 5:2. Paul only uses this term one other time. In 2 Cor 12:2, Paul refers to his own morning over those who have sinned but not yet repented from impurity (ἀκαθαρσία), immorality (πορνεία), and licentiousness (ἀσελγεία). The grief that Paul endures is linked to God’s humbling of him before the Corinthians on account of these sins. Rosner refers to Paul’s mourning as a “godly sorrow” and contends that it is an “Ezra-like Paul” who mourns over the sins of the church as Ezra grieved the sin of the community.122 Paul’s use of πενθέω in the context of 2 Cor 12:2 certainly links mourning to sin and to the need for repentance. Furthermore, it is clear from 2 Corinthians that Paul sees mourning as an appropriate response to πορνεία, as he likewise assumes in 1 Cor 5:2. It is certainly plausible that the motif of corporate responsibility has influenced Paul’s instruction. In this motif it is often the sin of one individual that demands the action of the whole community (e.g., Josh 7; Num 16:24, 27). Furthermore, the sin of that individual taints the people as a whole (e.g. Josh 7:1).123 As for the situation in the Corinthian church, the immoral man is not the only guilty party. Paul treats the community as guilty of allowing, and perhaps even enabling, the sin in their midst. Reading 5:1–13 in light of Paul’s paschal illustration demonstrates the urgency with which the community must act. The apostle tells the believers to take responsibility for one another in 5:12 by shunning those whose actions can corrupt the whole congregation. This does not mean that Paul is calling the Corinthians to withdraw from the world. The insiders are not to form a hermetic community, but a peculiar one. Paul’s goal is not the exclusion of the offenders, but the purity and well-being of the community. Driving out the evil person is, for Paul, an action necessary to reflect the community’s true status as God’s holy temple (6:19; 3:16–17). The paschal sacrifice has been made, and their status has already changed as a result of that sacrifice. They have been bought with a price (6:19–20).

121 Brian Rosner, “‘ΟΥΧΙ ΜΑΛΛΟΝ ΕΠΕΝΘΗΖΑΤΕ’ Corporate Responsibility in 1 Corinthians 5,” NTS 38 ( 1992), 471; cf. idem, “‘Drive out the wicked person’ A Biblical Theology of Exclusion,” EvQ 71 (1999): 25–36, 28. 122 Rosner, “Corporate Responsibility in 1 Corinthians 5,” 472; cf. Shillington who argues that πενθέω connotes “a humble self-denial similar to that enjoined in Leviticus 23 for the Day of Atonement” (“Atonement Texture in 1 Corinthians 5.5,” 41). 123 Rosner, “Corporate Responsibility in 1 Corinthians 5,” 470.

D. Being “A New Lump”

155

D. Being “A New Lump:” The Identity of the Community D. Being “A New Lump”

Does Paul’s invitation for the Corinthians to feast have implications for the Corinthians’ identity? Paul could have told the Corinthians to expel the sinner without including an allusion to paschal imagery. Furthermore, as he does in Gal 5:9, he could have ended his exodus allusion with a reference to the removal of leaven. Paul, however, is not simply concerned that the Corinthians act hastily to discipline the offender. He is also worried about the welfare of the whole community as people who are “unleavened.” Reading 1 Corinthians 5 through the adapted paschal tradition of 5:6–8 highlights the new identity of the community. Those who were “Gentiles” are now “the temple of God.” In the beginning of the chapter, there is a hint that Paul no longer simply views the Corinthians as Gentiles. In 5:1, Paul exclaims that such an immoral practice would not even be found among the Gentiles (ἔθνη 5:1). If Paul uses ἔθνη to refer to those outside the church, who are the Corinthians? Most of the Corinthian church appear to be non-Jewish believers.124 This is congruent with Paul’s own casting of himself as an “apostle of the Gentiles.”125 In this letter, the term ἔθνη represents those outside the church or the past of those within it.126 In 1:23, the Gentiles are those for whom the cross is nothing more than folly, and in 5:1, they are the epitome of sinners. Paul acknowledges in 12:2 that his audience used to be Gentiles (ἔθνη).127 Paul no longer regards the Corinthian believers simply as Gentiles. Now, as Gentiles who have been granted life by God (1:30), they are charged with bringing glory to God (6:20; 10:31; cf. Rom 15:9). Although Paul may treat the believers like Israelites here by enjoining them to feast, he never calls them such in this letter. Instead, the Gentiles’ presence in the body of Christ stands as testimony to the power of God (1:18).128 Whatever identity previously 124 Paul’s statement in 12:2 “when you were Gentiles” suggests that he is speaking to a majority of Gentiles, but he includes Jews in his rhetoric (1 Cor 1:22, 23, 24; 9:20; 10:32; 12:13). 125 Rom 11:13; see also Rom 1:5, 9:24; 15:16; Gal 1:16; 2:2, 8–9; cf. Acts 15:19; 18:6. 126 Cf. Rom 11:13 where Paul explicitly addresses the “Gentiles” within the church. For references to the Greeks and Jews, see 1 Cor 1:22–24; 10:32; 12:13. Cf. Gal 3:28; 1 Thess 4:5; Col 3:11. 127 See Wayne Meeks for more “insider/outsider” language in the Pauline letters, First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul (New Haven: Yale, 2003), 94– 103, esp. 95. 128 Similarly, Romans 15:7–13 portrays an eschatological vision where Jew and Gentile praise God together with one voice. This unity is a characterized as a fulfillment of God’s promises: “For I tell you that Christ became a servant to the circumcised to show God’s truthfulness, in order to confirm the promises given to the patriarchs, and in order that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy” (Rom 15:8–9a). Rather than erasing one’s

156

Chapter 4: Be As You Really Are

characterized the Corinthians (12:13), their primary identity is now the “church of God” (1:2; 10:32). The application of the exodus tradition to signal this new identity is not insignificant. Paul has chosen a portion of Israel’s traditions that is intimately connected with their identity as God’s chosen people. These traditions were not only to be passed down from generation to generation (Exod 12:26– 27), but as they were handed on they were reinterpreted again and again to meet the needs of a new generation of God’s people. As new generations faced crises and social challenges to their identity, the exodus traditions were transformed to speak to a new time and place. In this way, these traditions lived on as each generation interpreted its present in light of God’s redemptive work in the past.129 Paul does not abandon the traditions of his ancestors, but transforms them in light of the Christ event. Paul invites the Corinthians to feast in a formerly insider-only ritual, because “Christ our πάσχα has been slain.” In conjunction with the paschal offering the Corinthians are something new; they are unleavened (5:7). The Corinthians are Gentiles no longer (12:2). Now, they are the church of God (1:2; 10:32; 11:22; cf. 15:9). Paul’s rhetoric transforms outsiders into insiders. By firmly planting his formerly Gentile audience into the traditions of Israel, Paul grants them a new past and provides them a way to interpret their present as God’s church. As the Israelites in the wilderness were in the midst of God’s salvation, so are the Corinthians. As the Israelites awaited entrance to the promised land, so the Corinthians await the coming kingdom (6:9–10). As the Israelites later came to celebrate Passover at the center of the cult in Jerusalem, so the Corinthians are the very temple of God (3:16–17). Paul’s paschal adaptation overlooks boundary markers of Jew and Gentile within the community (12:12–13; cf. Rom 3:22; 10:12; Gal 3:28) and establishes a unified identity as the body of Christ (12:27; cf. 3:23; 6:12–20; 10:17; 12:12–31).130 Through Paul’s appeal to a ritual thoroughly connected with the purification of the whole group, he invites the believers to be transformed by the act of feasting on the one bread of purity and truth (5:8; 10:17). In this way, the act of feasting sees as its present goal the metamorphosis of the body into the new, purified lump. Those who partake of the one bread are the one body (5:8; 10:17; 11:23–26) and truly bear witness to the “church of God” (1 Cor 10:32).

identity as “Jew” or “Gentile” the cross creates a primary identity that is established by God in Christ. 129 See Chapter One. 130 See Meeks, First Urban Christians, 97.

E. Paul’s Use of Exodus Traditions in 1 Corinthians 5:6-8

157

E. Paul’s Use of Exodus Traditions in 1 Corinthians 5:6–8 E. Paul’s Use of Exodus Traditions in 1 Corinthians 5:6-8

Paul’s christocentric interpretation of paschal traditions in 1 Corinthians 5:1– 13 serves as the impetus for his instructions to remove the sinner from the congregation and highlights the necessity for the Corinthians to seek purity in order to reflect the holy God who dwells among them (6:19). As he did in 10:1–22, Paul freely reads God’s work in the exodus together with God’s work through the cross. In 1 Cor 5:1–13, Paul’s entire argument rests on the conviction that Christ “our πάσχα has been slain” and the corollary to this argument: “You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body” (6:19–20). Paul’s recollection of paschal traditions through the lens of the cross informs his view of God’s work among this congregation and drives his instructions for the church to truly be the people whom God has caused them to be. Just as God is the primary agent in Israel’s exodus, throughout Paul’s instructions in 1 Corinthians concerning the man’s immoral behavior God is an active agent. God is the one who prepared the sacrifice and who offered the Corinthians room at the table (5:7–8). God is the one who is responsible for the Corinthians to be washed, sanctified, and justified (6:11) and who thereby made them “unleavened” (5:7a). This passage highlights the utter weakness of the community without the power of God. Apart from Christ, there is no salvation. The believers did not make themselves “unleavened,” and it is only God’s power through Christ that enables them to live in a manner pleasing to God. God is the one who judges outsiders (5:13) and who liberates insiders (6:11). It is no wonder that Paul would again remind the Corinthians that their bodies are the temple of God (6:19; cf. 3:16–17). They have indeed been purchased with a price (6:20), and it is “the power of our Lord Jesus” that enables them to act appropriately when assembled “in the name of our Lord Jesus” (5:4). This theme of God’s power resonates in Paul’s argument in chapter 10 as well, for there it is God alone who formed the Corinthians as well as their “ancestors” into a community (10:1–4). Furthermore, only God’s power is able to save the Corinthians from temptations (10:13). God is not the only agent, however. As in 1 Cor 10:18–19, Paul’s apocalyptic imagination is evident. The apostle envisions the real peril of living outside the community of God. In the ancestral examples of 1 Cor 10:6–11, the unfaithfulness of the Israelites led to disastrous consequences. In 1 Cor 10:20–21, the Corinthians are potentially dining with demons, and the threat of the “destroyer” looms in 10:10. In 1 Corinthians 5 the stakes are equally high. Here, Paul reveals that to live outside the community is to live in a realm where Satan has power. It is to return to a realm where Death is victorious. Furthermore, allowing the sin of this man in the congregation is compared to the corrupting power of leaven in 5:6. Here leaven is symbolic of

158

Chapter 4: Be As You Really Are

the old age since Paul qualifies the leaven as τὴν παλαιὰν ζύµην.131 This old leaven is certainly not indicative of the Corinthians’ new life in the Spirit. In the midst of the real threat of Satan’s power, Paul admonishes the Spirit-filled community to act. God’s agency in producing this community also necessitates the community’s agency to live as “unleavened.” By virtue of God’s acts in Christ to wash, to sanctify, and to justify this community (6:11), the Corinthians are the “church of God.” Thus, the final agent in this cosmic drama is the church, the community called by God, transformed by God’s power, and dependent upon the Spirit to act in a manner to bring glory to God. J. Louis Martyn articulates the church as human agent in this manner: The Israel of God (Gal 6.16), this newly competent and corporate agent, is the only agent that can be effectively addressed with hortatory and imperative verbs; for, as noted, it is into the heart of this agent that God has sent the Spirit of his Son, specifically the pneuma tou estaurômenou, thus reforming the human agent by communally forming Christ in that agent, the church (Gal. 4.19; Rom. 8.29).132

Paul’s admonitions to this “new” community demand that the Corinthians be who they really are (5:7), the Spirit-filled body of Christ (12:4–27). The reality that the community has failed to live according to the Spirit, however, is evident in the fact that Paul must now admonish them. Like 1 Cor 10:1–22, Paul’s exodus imagery in 1 Cor 5:6–8 highlights how permeable and vulnerable the community truly is. The church’s toleration of the man’s sin is a threat to the whole body. Thus, the sin of one member of the body can have a detrimental effect on the whole when the rest of the body fails to live according to the Spirit. Since Paul links the church’s toleration to boasting, there is no evidence in chapter 5 that the church itself is divided over this man’s behavior. Paul’s argument assumes that the whole church is guilty of approving the behavior. Given that various forms of incest were considered detestable in the Corinthians’ world (5:1), Paul does not need to spend time proving the man’s action is sinful. Rather, the focus is on the effect that this action is having on the community and the church’s corporate responsibility to live as those who are unleavened (5:6–13). This same concern for the community is evident in 8:7–13, where the actions of those who eat idol food might lead others astray. In chapter 8, those who are in danger of destruction are the weak who might be tempted to follow after so-called gods and lords. Paul’s charge to the knowledgeable in 8:12 is severe: “Thus,

131

For a survey of leaven as symbolic of evil, see Hans Windisch, “ζύµη, ζυµόω, ἄζυµος,” TDNT 2: 902–906. 132 See J. Louis Martyn, “Epilogue: An Essay in Pauline Meta-Ethics,” in Divine and Human Agency in Paul and His Cultural Environment, ed. J. M. G Barclay and S. J. Gathercole (London: T & T Clark, 2006), 178–182.

E. Paul’s Use of Exodus Traditions in 1 Corinthians 5:6-8

159

by sinning against your brothers and sisters and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ.” In conclusion, there exists an integral connection among the so-called theological and social aspects of living as the church of God. Paul’s use of exodus traditions in 1 Corinthians occurs in response to two dilemmas facing the church: tolerating a grotesque sin within the community and eating food that has been sacrificed to idols. Paul frames neither of these dilemmas as purely social in nature. In 10:1–4, the existence of the ancestral community is linked to God, just as the Corinthian community owes its life to God (1:30). In 10:14–22, the Corinthians’ common participation in the eucharist indicates their unity in Christ, and in 10:22 Paul warns that their behavior could incite the Lord’s jealousy. In chapter 5, God is the one who has provided Christ as πάσχα and who enables them to feast (5:8). God is the cause of the Corinthians’ being “unleavened” (5:7, 9–11). God has fashioned them into a community and has offered them salvation from destruction (5:5). In this letter, Paul consistently uses the exodus traditions to teach the Corinthians that they are a community that owes its existence to God and, because they are the church of God, their behavior must be indicative of their life in Christ.

Conclusion

Paul’s Use of Exodus Traditions in 1 Corinthians Paul’s use of exodus traditions in 1 Corinthians 5:6–8 and 10:1–22 reflects the apostle’s conviction that the church should learn from scripture (1 Cor 10:11; Rom 15:4). The story of Israel’s exodus, a story first and foremost about God, was formative in shaping Israel’s identity as the people of God. Paul finds in this tradition fitting instruction for the fledgling church at Corinth, a church called into existence by the same God who elected Israel. The exodus narrative both informs Paul’s thinking about a community who belongs to Israel’s God and provides examples for the Corinthians to consider what it means to be the “church of God.” These traditions illustrate God’s steadfast fidelity (1 Cor 10:13) and jealousy (10:22) and provide instruction for the church. For a community divided over the consumption of idol food (8:1–11:1) and undisturbed by a man who is sleeping with his stepmother (5:1–13), Israel’s exodus illustrates the need for holiness and warns against unfaithfulness. Paul does not merely adopt Israel’s exodus traditions, however, without interpreting them for the church. Paul reads these traditions in light of the Christ event and in view of the Corinthians’ dilemmas. Chapters Two through Four contained a detailed analysis of Paul’s use and adaptation of the exodus traditions in 1 Cor 5:6–8 and 10:1–22. In this final section, it is time to consider how the exodus allusions might be heard in the reading of the letter and to draw some conclusions about Paul’s use of exodus traditions in 1 Corinthians.

A. Re-reading the Exodus Traditions in Literary Order A. Re-reading the Exodus Traditions in Literary Order

This study has treated 1 Cor 10:1–22 first because it contains the lengthiest reference to Israel’s exodus in 1 Corinthians. Those present at the reading of this letter, however, would not have heard the retelling of the exodus in 10:1– 22 before hearing Paul’s instructions in 5:1–13 regarding the man who was having an inappropriate relationship with his stepmother. When considering these passages in their literary order, with the paschal imagery of 1 Corinthians 5 preceding the exodus rehearsal of 1 Corinthians 10, it is evident that the concise illustration in 1 Corinthians 5 prepares the reader for the lengthier

A. Re-reading the Exodus Traditions in Literary Order

161

exodus rehearsal in 1 Corinthians 10. More specifically, the reference to Christ as “our πάσχα” in 1 Cor 5:7 provides the rationale not only for the Corinthians’ invitation to feast (5:8) but also for the lesson from “our ancestors” (10:1). In 1 Cor 5:6–8 Paul combines three images from paschal observance: (1) the removal of leaven (5:6); (2) the term πάσχα (5:7); and (3) an invitation to feast (5:8). The metaphor of leaven as a corrupting agent could stand alone, as it does in Gal 5:9 (“A little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough”). However, Paul does not end his instruction with the removal of the leaven. The believers are to excommunicate the immoral man from among them (5:5, 13), judge those inside the community (5:12), and flee porneia (6:18). The removal of the sinner is only part of Paul’s concern. The apostle never addresses the man directly. Rather, he is far more concerned with the community who has already been washed, sanctified, and justified through Christ’s work on the cross (6:11). Since “our πάσχα” has been slain (5:7), the Corinthians must hurry to remove the leaven (5:6–7a) so that they may celebrate the festival with the unleavened bread of purity and truth (5:8). The word πάσχα is a clear reference to Israel’s Passover, and the reference equates Christ with the slaughtered lamb. It is Christ’s death that fills this entire passage (5:1–13) with a sense of urgency. Since the sacrifice has been already made, the Corinthians are behind in their preparations for the feast. Though they are a community that has been purified by God (5:7a; 6:11), they still have leaven among them. It is also the paschal reference in verse 7 that provides the basis for the invitation to keep the feast in 5:8. Through Christ, the Corinthians have a place at the table. Paul’s use of exodus traditions in 1 Cor 5:6–8 reveals (1) Paul’s certainty that through Christ the nations can be washed, sanctified, and justified; (2) Paul’s conviction that the Corinthians are called by God to be holy, and (3) Paul’s understanding that this new status in Christ has communal implications. First, God has created this church through Christ. God has taken a people who would have formerly been excluded from the paschal table and made them “insiders” (5:12). The Corinthians’ identity as a church is completely enmeshed with the actions of this God who has not only washed, sanctified, and justified the Corinthians (6:11), but has also caused his Holy Spirit to indwell them (5:5; 6:15). They are not their own, but have been bought with a price (6:20). They are now “members of Christ” (6:15). Second, because they have been redeemed by God (6:19–20), they are called to be holy as God is holy. In 5:7 Paul urges them to “be a new lump, as you really are unleavened.” Since Christ “our πάσχα” has been sacrificed, the Corinthians are invited to feast on the unleavened bread of “purity” and “truth” (5:8). They are called to behave in a manner that is congruent with their newfound status as a purified people (6:11). Finally, it is only as God’s

162

Conclusion

church, infused with God’s Spirit (6:15), that they are enabled to act for the benefit of the whole community. In 5:12, Paul urges them to judge those inside the community, and in 6:12 Paul lifts up the common good as a standard of behavior.1 The imagery of 5:6–8 prepares the audience for the exodus imagery of 10:1–22. The reference to “our ancestors” in 10:1 might be jarring to an audience who had never claimed Israelites as their forefathers. Yet, as 5:7 has already illustrated, through Christ the Corinthians, too, belong to God. They are a new lump of dough (5:7), a community sanctified by God (1:2; 6:11). This idea of a community, formed by God’s actions, is critical to Paul’s argument in 10:1–22. If Paul read Israel’s paschal allusions into the church’s experience in 5:6–8, it is also the case that the apostle is reading the church’s experience into Israel’s exodus story in 10:1–4. The manner in which Paul introduces these forefathers evokes the Corinthians’ own experiences of baptism and eucharist (10:3–4, 16–17). By depicting the two groups as undergoing similar rites, Paul is adapting Israel’s story to speak to the needs of the Corinthian community. In fact, in 1 Cor 10:6–11 Paul urges the church to learn from the mistakes of their “ancestors.” Like the paschal imagery in 5:1–13, Paul’s use of exodus traditions in 10:1–22 also conveys a sense of urgency and demands action. The church is living at the end of the ages (10:11) and dangerously close to provoking the Lord’s jealousy (10:22). While there are certainly threats of danger for individuals who fail to be faithful in 5:5, in 10:5–11 it is unmistakable that most of the ancestors were overthrown in the wilderness and that the Corinthians are in danger of following the same path (10:22). The exodus traditions in chapter 10 demonstrate the real peril the church faces when it neglects the needs of the “weak” brothers and sisters for whom Christ died (8:1–13) or when some flirt with idolatry (10:14). For any Corinthians who may deny the existence of other so-called gods and lords, Paul causes all to ask whether or not a table has been set before demons (10:20–21). Paul expects the Corinthians to avoid repeating the mistakes of their ancestors. As Richard Hays notes, all the sins of the ancestors can be related to the sins of the Corinthians – idolatry, sexual immorality, putting Christ to the test, and grumbling.2 Idolatry seems particularly pertinent to the larger dilemma over eating idol food in the local temples, and the rest of the sins could certainly be related to the factionalism of this community.3 These sins, however, are not merely social problems. In the exodus narratives that preserve stories of Israel’s grumbling, sexual immorality, and testing, those 1

See also Margaret M. Mitchell, Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1991), 146. 2 Hays, 1 Corinthians, 164–165. 3 As Mitchell argues, Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation, 147.

A. Re-reading the Exodus Traditions in Literary Order

163

traditions again and again interpret Israel’s behavior as acts of unfaithfulness to God.4 Factionalism and unfaithfulness are intertwined. How the ancestors behaved was interpreted as a reflection of what they believed about God. As Paul underscores in 1 Corinthians, the consequences of the ancestors’ unfaithfulness were dire. Paul finds in the stories of the exodus critical warnings for the church to trust in God’s faithfulness (10:14), to flee idolatry (10:14), and to be the members of Christ that God has called them to be (10:16–17). Their squabbles over idol food, the apostle warns, are inherently theological. The Corinthians are, after all, a fellowship created by God. The paschal imagery in chapter 5 has already employed Israel’s scripture to highlight the concern for community, a concern that courses throughout the larger argument of 8:1–11:1. Paul’s primary use of scripture in this passage is to instruct the corporate body (10:6, 11). The appeal to exodus traditions fuels his call to consider the needs of one’s brother or sister (8:10–13), since all who have partaken the one bread are “one body” (10:16–17). He urges the Corinthians to give no offense to “Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God” (10:32). The exodus traditions teach the church to withstand any temptation that might cause a brother or sister in Christ to stumble (10:13; 8:10–13). Paul’s argument in chapter 10 is summed up in the call to consider the common good (10:23; cf. 6:12) of one’s neighbor (10:24). That common good is closely linked with glorifying God (10:23, 31–32; cf. 6:12, 20). What might this pursuit of the common good look like? Paul has provided himself as an example of one who does not seek his own advantage, but the good of many, for the sake of others’ salvation (10:33–11:1; 9:1–27). Ultimately, according to 11:1, by imitating Paul they are imitating Christ. In conclusion, though the use of exodus traditions is quite brief in chapter 5, there are themes introduced in Paul’s use of paschal traditions that are more fully developed in the lengthier exodus rehearsal of chapter 10. Undergirding Paul’s use of exodus traditions in both passages is the conviction that both the Corinthian church and the Israelites belong to God and their connection to this God should be manifested in the way they live in community with one another and in witness to their world. In Christ, the Corinthians have a new identity. Their status as the church of God has implications for their behavior toward God and their behavior toward one another. If the congregation failed to grasp this lesson in chapter 5, Paul develops it more fully in 10:1–22.

4

See Chapter Two.

164

Conclusion

B. Paul’s Use of Exodus Traditions B. Paul’s Use of Exodus Traditions

This study has not been limited to places where Paul has explicitly cited Israel’s scripture. Rather, the goal of this study was to look at how Paul is using a larger scriptural narrative – a narrative that is not bound to one text or one interpreter, but a tradition that gets told and retold in Israel’s scriptures and in Hellenistic Jewish literature.5 The appeal of using 1 Corinthians for this study is two-fold: (1) Paul includes a rather lengthy rehearsal of Israel’s exodus traditions in this letter (10:1–22). Although there is only one citation of scripture in this passage (10:7), the majority of scholarship recognizes allusions to exodus traditions in 10:1–13 in particular. Furthermore, Paul explicitly refers to πάσχα in 5:7 and uses paschal imagery in 5:6–8. The paucity of direct quotations in these passages makes them particularly fruitful to consider how exodus allusions function in Paul’s argument. (2) Although exodus traditions are part and parcel of Jewish identity, Paul includes allusions to exodus traditions in a letter written to a predominantly Gentile audience. While it is debatable how familiar the Corinthians would be with exodus traditions and paschal observance, I have argued that Paul’s rhetoric assumes familiarity on the part of some.6 Studying how Paul appeals to this scriptural narrative in a letter written to Gentiles offers insight as to how Paul believes scripture should function for the church’s instruction. Since there is only one direct quotation of Israel’s scriptures in 1 Cor 5:6– 8 and 10:1–22, this project has considered multiple texts that recount pieces of Israel’s exodus and preserve paschal practices. In 10:6–11 Paul makes detailed references to the exodus story. Those details provide some guidance as to plausible sources behind Paul’s thought. However, it is not always possible, or even necessary, to pinpoint the source behind Paul’s allusions. Paul’s use of exodus allusions in 1 Corinthians reflects his exposure to multiple exodus traditions. Since the exodus is a living tradition that gets told and retold, Paul at times reads the exodus in similar ways to other scriptural traditions or even to his contemporaries (e.g., the emphasis on God’s faithfulness).7 In other places, compared to Paul’s contemporaries, Paul seems to be making adaptations creatively for his audience. For example, nowhere does the Septuagint refer to the crossing of the sea as a “baptism” nor is there any identification of the rock with Christ. It is fair to say that there is both continuity and discontinuity between Paul’s use of exodus traditions and the use of these traditions throughout scripture and by Paul’s contemporaries. The continuity of Paul’s use of exodus traditions centers on theology and praxis. As discussed in the first chapter, the exodus is a story about Israel’s 5

See the survey in Chapter One. See the Introduction. 7 See discussions in Chapters Two through Four. 6

B. Paul’s Use of Exodus Traditions

165

God. It has been used for generations to teach a people who this God is and what it means to be in covenant with the Lord. To state this observation another way, Paul has learned from generations of interpreters before him that the exodus is a story about God’s identity and fidelity. It is no surprise that Paul would then highlight God’s faithfulness (10:13) and jealousy (10:22). What the church believes about God is wed to its praxis. Paul is appealing to portions of the tradition that help illustrate the Corinthians’ responsibility as the “church of God.” If Paul were simply trying to educate the Corinthians about Israel’s exodus, he could have employed other pieces of the tradition. For instance, in his retelling in 10:1–13, Paul does not mention slavery in Egypt, but yet he includes other details like “twenty-three thousand” people falling in a single day (10:8). Some of the references that the apostle includes are rather obscure (see the discussion in Chapter Two). Paul has chosen to highlight pieces that would serve as a warning (10:6, 11) and propel the church to faithfulness. Likewise, the paschal allusions in 5:6–8 illustrate the importance of holiness, sincerity, and truth as the believers respond to the sin in their midst (5:1–13). There are also notable places of discontinuity between Paul’s appeal to the exodus in 1 Corinthians and other exodus interpretations. The discontinuities center around Paul’s christology. Paul is re-reading the exodus story through the lens of the cross and resurrection. It is through Christ that the Corinthians can claim a place at the feast (5:8) as insiders. The church belongs to Christ and Christ to God (3:23). In Paul’s reading, Christ is both the source of Israel’s sustenance (the “rock” 10:4) and the church’s πάσχα (5:7). Through Christ the Israelites and the Corinthians are related to the same God. What might Paul’s use of exodus traditions reveal about the identity of the Corinthians? It was noted at the beginning that the exodus narrative is a key story associated with Jewish identity. By writing the Corinthian church into Israel’s exodus tradition has Paul thereby displaced Israel? µὴ γένοιτο. It is true that the apostle no longer sees the Corinthians as Gentiles led astray by mute idols (12:2), but he also does not call the Corinthians “Israel” in this letter. Instead Paul maintains the distinctiveness and diversity of the peoples who belong to God. If the church simply displaces Israel, then Paul cannot insist on God’s faithfulness (1:9; 10:13), since God’s provision for the ancestors provides proof of divine faithfulness in Paul’s argument (see also Romans 9:1–18). Rather, for Paul, the gospel is God’s power for salvation to the Jew first and to the Greek (Rom 1:16). The existence of the “church of God” does not erase the distinctiveness of Jew and Gentile, but rather it is the same Spirit of the same God that binds all together. The baptismal formula of 12:12–13 (cf. Gal 3:28) claims that Jew and Gentile become one in Christ, but never says that they become the same. As Kendall Soulen argues,

166

Conclusion

What the church rejects is not the difference of Jew and Gentile, male and female, but rather the idea that these differences essentially entail curse, opposition, and antithesis. Understood in this way, the church is the social embodiment of the doctrine of justification, for justification in its social dimension means the reconciliation of different kinds of people. Reconciliation does not mean the imposition of sameness, but the unity of recipro8 cal blessing.

Through Christ, the church participates in God’s blessing of life that God wants for all creation. Paul’s adoption and adaptation of Israel’s exodus stories teach the Gentile believers more about this ancient and faithful God who has called them into existence and granted them new life in Christ (1 Cor 1:20). The identity of this God is paramount to the gospel Paul preaches and the formation of community whom God has set apart. By using the exodus to speak directly to the church, Paul has tailored his appeal to scripture both in light of Christ and with respect to the Corinthians’ situation.

C. Conclusion: The “Church of God” in Corinth C. Conclusion: The “Church of God” in Corinth

Our investigation began with the acknowledgement that stories have the power to shape a people. As John Collins noted, “Identity, whether of a people or of an individual, is a matter of knowing who one is, where one is coming from, and where one is going.”9 For Paul, the church’s identity is in Christ. The apostle expects the word of the cross to guide the Corinthians’ whole way of life and reconfigure their loyalties (1 Cor 1:18–2:16). The victory of the cross is the work of the ancient and faithful God of Israel who has called the church into existence. This God, however, is not like the gods of the Corinthian religious landscape. This is a jealous God. For generations the exodus narratives have taught people about the identity of this God and what God expects from God’s people. In Paul’s desire to see the Corinthians live into their role as God’s church, Paul in our two crucial passages has turned to scripture, particularly Israel’s exodus traditions, to instruct the Corinthians how to live as the “church of God.” According to Paul’s portrayal of the Corinthians’ behavior, members of this church are disputing how to live faithfully to only one God and one Lord (8:6) and whether it is necessary to change their lifestyles in order to do so. The apostle has the formidable task to teach the Corinthians how to be the church in the midst of many so-called gods and lords. One strategy that Paul uses in this letter is to read scripture through the lens of the cross. As Chapters Two through Four demonstrated, in Paul’s use 8

R. Kendall Soulen, The God of Israel and Christian Theology (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996), 170. 9 John J. Collins, Between Athens and Jerusalem (New York: Crossroad, 1983), 1–2.

C. Conclusion: The “Church of God” in Corinth

167

of exodus traditions in 1 Corinthians 5 and 10 there is a deliberate wedding of scripture with the word of the cross. Paul freely adapts the exodus narrative by including the Corinthians in the story and by linking both the Corinthians and their “ancestors” to God’s actions. By appealing to the exodus story – a story used to teach Israel about God – Paul instructs the Corinthians that, through the cross, they are now bound to a jealous God. They belong to Christ and Christ to God (3:23). Belonging to God has implications for how they should treat one another and how they should view their religious environment. Paul’s christological reading of scripture is not divorced from the mission at Corinth. Instead, his own rereading of Israel’s stories occurs in light of the dilemmas facing this congregation. No longer can the Corinthians dine in temples for a social gathering without considering the theological implications (8:10–13; 10:14–22). No longer can they allow social etiquette or class distinctions to keep them from honoring God and caring for one another (5:1– 6:20). Rather, living faithfully as the church of God means that the Corinthians must honor God and love their brother or sister in Christ. Their theological status in Christ has social implications because now they are the “church of God.” In conclusion, Paul, who is constantly learning from scripture, turns to a story that has been used again and again to teach a people about God. Without God, there is neither Israel nor the church. This God makes the predominantly Gentile Corinthian church a distinctive assembly in their environment. This God is the source of their life through Christ (1:30). Failing to glorify this God, therefore, by neglecting one’s neighbor or by flirting with idolatry is to fall short of living as the church who is the temple of God’s Holy Spirit and the body of Christ. Paul is creating a “a self-conscious and distinctive identity”10 for a people whose existence is now dependent upon a God who acts through the foolishness of the cross, who works in ways that are counterintuitive to the Corinthians’ world, and who is known to be a jealous God. With urgency in his voice, the apostle pleads with the Corinthian church in this letter to “be who you really are,” the church of God.

10 Judith Lieu, Neither Jew nor Greek: Constructing Early Christianity (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2002), 171.

Bibliography Bibliography Aageson, James W. Written Also for Our Sake: Paul and the Art of Biblical Interpretation. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1993. Adams, Edward. Constructing the World: A Study in Paul’s Cosmological Language. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2000. Adams, Edward and David G. Horrell, eds. Christianity at Corinth: The Quest for the Pauline Church. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2004. Aland, Barbara, Kurt Aland, Johannes Karavidopoulos, Carlo M. Martini, and Bruce M. Metzger, eds. Novum Testamentum Graece. Nestle-Aland 27. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1993. Alcock, Susan. Graecia Capta: The Landscapes of Roman Greece. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. Allan, George. The Importances of the Past: A Meditation on the Authority of Tradition. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1986. Allo, E. B. Saint Paul. Première Épitre aux Corinthiens. 2nd ed. Paris: Galbalda, 1956. Amandry, Michel. Le monnayage des duovirs corinthiens. Athens: École Française D’Athenes, 1988. Anderson, Gary. “Moses and Jonah in Gethsemane: Representation and Impassibility in Their Old Testament Inflections.” In Seeking the Identity of Jesus: A Pilgrimage, edited by Beverly Roberts Gaventa and Richard B. Hays, 215–231. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008. The Apostolic Fathers. Edited and translated by Bart D. Ehrman. 2 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2003. Assmann, Jan. “Guilt and Remembrance: On the Theologization of History in the Ancient Near East.” History and Memory 2 (1990): 5–33. –. Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Egypt in Western Monotheism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1997. Attridge, H.W. The Interpretation of Biblical History in the Antiquitates Judaicae of Flavius Josephus. Missoula: Scholars Press, 1976. Badke, William B. “Baptized into Moses—Baptized into Christ: A Study in Doctrinal Development.” Evangelical Quarterly 60 (1988): 23–29. Baird, W. “1 Corinthians 10:1–13.” Interpretation 44 (1990): 286–290. Bandstra, A. “Interpretation in 1 Cor 10:1–11.” Calvin Theological Journal 6 (1971): 5– 21. Barclay, John M. G. Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora from Alexander to Trajan (323 B.C.E.–117 C.E.). Berkeley: University of California, 1996. –. “Manipulating Moses: Exodus 2.10–15 in Egyptian Judaism and the New Testament.” Pages 28–46 in Text as Pretext: Essays in Honour of Robert Davidson. Edited by Robert P. Carroll. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series 138. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1992.

170

Bibliography

–. “Thessalonica and Corinth: Social Contrasts in Pauline Christianity." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 47 (1992): 49–74. – and Simon Gathercole, eds. Divine and Human Agency in Paul and his Cultural Environment. London: T & T Clark, 2006. Barnard, L. W. “The Early Roman Church, Judaism, and Jewish-Christianity.” Anglican Theological Review 49 (1967): 371–84. Barrett, C. K. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. Black’s New Testament Commentary. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996. –. “Things Sacrificed to Idols.” New Testament Studies 11 (1965): 138–153. Barth, Karl. The Resurrection of the Dead. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1933. Baumert, N. “Κοινωνία τοῦ αἵµατος τοῦ Χριστοῦ (1 Kor 10:14–22).” In The Corinthian Correspondence. Edited by R. Bieringer, 617–626. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1996. Beale, G. K. and D. A. Carson, eds. Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007. Beard, Mary, John North and Simon Price. Religions of Rome: Volume I A History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Bell, Catharine. Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992. Bell, Richard H. Deliver Us from Evil. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 216. Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 2007. Bieringer, R., ed. The Corinthian Correspondence. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1996. –. Provoked to Jealousy: The Origin and Purpose of the Jealousy Motif in Romans 9–11. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2, ser. 63. Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 1994. Birch, Bruce, Walter Brueggemann, Terence E. Fretheim and David L. Petersen. A Theological Introduction to the Old Testament. Nashville: Abingdon, 1999. Blenkinsopp, Joseph. “Memory, Tradition and the Construction of the Past in Ancient Israel.” Biblical Theology Bulletin 27 (1997): 76–82. Blomberg, C. L. 1 Corinthians. NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994. Bokser, Baruch. The Origins of the Seder: The Passover Rite and Early Rabbinic Judaism. Berkley: University of California Press, 1984. –. “Ritualizing the Seder.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 56 (1988): 443– 472. –. “Unleavened Bread and Passover, Feasts of.” Pages 754–65 in vol. 6 of Anchor Bible Dictionary. 6 vols. New York: Doubleday, 1992. Bookidis, Nancy. “Religion in Corinth: 146 B.C.E. to 100 C.E.” In Urban Religion in Roman Corinth: Interdisciplinary Approaches, edited by Daniel N. Schowalter and Steven J. Friesen, 141–164. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2005. Borgen, P. “‘Yes’, ‘No’, ‘How Far?’ The Participation of Jews and Christians in Pagan Cults.” In Paul in His Hellenistic Context, edisted by T. Engberg-Pedersen, 30–59. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995. Botha, Pieter J. J. “Greco–Roman Literacy as Setting for New Testament Writings.” Neotestimentica 26 (1992): 195–215. Brettler, Marc Zvi. “Memory in Ancient Israel.” In Memory and History in Christianity and Judaism, edited by M. Signer, 1–17. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2001.

Bibliography

171

Brodie, Thomas L. “The Systematic Use of the Pentateuch in 1 Corinthians.” In The Corinthian Correspondence, edited by R. Bieringer, 441–457. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1996. Broneer, O. “Paul and the Pagan Cults at Isthmia.” Harvard Theological Review 64 (1971): 169–187. –. “The Apostle Paul and the Isthmian Games.” Biblical Archaeologist 25 (1962): 1–31. Brown, Alexandra. The Cross and Human Transformation: Paul’s Apocalyptic Word in 1 Corinthians. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995. Bruce, F. F. 1 and 2 Corinthians. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1971. Brunt, John. “Rejected, Ignored, or Misunderstood? The Fate of Paul’s Approach to the Problem of Food Offered to Idols in Early Christianity.” New Testament Studies 31(1985): 113–124. Byrne, Brendan. Romans. Sacra Pagina. Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 2007. Cambier, J. “La Chair et l’Esprit en 1 Cor. v.5.” New Testament Studies 15 (1969): 221– 232. Campbell, Barth. “Flesh and Spirit in 1 Cor 5:5: An Exercise in Rhetorical Criticism of the New Testament.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 36 (1993): 331–42. Campbell, J. Y. “KOINONIA and its Cognates in the New Testament.” Journal of Biblical Literature 51 (1932): 352–380. Campbell, William S. Paul and the Creation of Christian Identity. London: T & T Clark, 2008. Charlesworth, James H., ed. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. 2 vols. New York: Doubleday, 1983–1985. Chilton, Bruce. A Feast of Meanings: Eucharistic Theologies from Jesus through Johannine Circles. Leiden: Brill, 1994. Chow, J.K. Patronage and Power: A Study of Social Networks in Corinth. Journal for the Study of the New Testament: Supplement Series 75. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1992. –. “Patronage in Roman Corinth.” Pages 104–125 in Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society. Edited by R. A. Horsley. Harrisburg: Trinity Press, 1997. Ciampa, Roy E. and Brian Rosner. “1 Corinthians.” In Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, edited by G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson, 695–752. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007. Ciampa, Roy E. “Deuteronomy in Galatians and Romans.” In Deuteronomy in the New Testament. Edited by Maarten J. J. Menken and Steve Moyise, 99–117. Library of New Testament Studies 358. London: T & T Clark, 2007. Clarke, Andrew D. Secular and Christian Leadership in Corinth: A Socio-Historical and Exegetical Study of 1 Corinthians 1–6. Leiden: Brill, 1993. Clarke, Andrew D. and Bruce W. Winter. eds. One God, One Lord: Christianity in a World of Religious Pluralism. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992. Clement of Alexandria. Stromata. Ante-Nicene Fathers. 10 vols. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1999. Cohick, Lynn H. The Peri Pascha Attributed to Melito of Sardis: Setting, Purpose, and Sources. Providence: Brown Judaic Studies, 2000. Colautti, Frederico M. Passover in the Works of Josephus. Leiden: Brill, 2002. Cole, G. A. “1 Cor. 5:4 ‘With My Spirit.’” Expository Times 98 (1987): 205. Collier, G. D. “‘That We Might Not Crave Evil’: The Structure and Argument of 1 Corinthians 10:1–13.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 55 (1994): 55–75.

172

Bibliography

Collins, Adela Yarbro. “The Function of ‘Excommunication’ in Paul.” Harvard Theological Review 73 (1980): 251–63. Collins, John J. Between Athens and Jerusalem. New York: Crossroad, 1983. –. “Reinventing Exodus: Exegesis and Legend in Hellenistic Egypt.” In For a Later Generation: The Transformation of Tradition in Israel, Early Judaism, and Early Christianity, edited by R. A. Argall, B. A. Bow, and R. A. Werline, 52–62. Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 2000. Collins, Raymond F. First Corinthians. Sacra Pagina. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1999. –. “‘It Was Indeed Written for Our Sake’ (1 Cor 9,10): Paul’s Use of Scripture in the First Letter to the Corinthians.” Studien zum Neuen Testament und seiner Umwelt 20 (1995): 151–170. Conzelmann, H. 1 Corinthians. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975. Cooper, E. J. “Man’s Basic Freedom and Freedom of Conscience in the Bible: Reflections on 1 Corinthians 8–10.” Irish Theological Quarterly 42 (1975): 272–283. Corbett, P. E. The Roman Law of Marriage. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969. Countryman, L. William. Dirt, Greed, and Sex: Sexual Ethics in the New Testament and their Implications for Today. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988. Coutsoumpos, P. Community, Conflict, and the Eucharist in Roman Corinth. Lanham, MD: The University Press of America, 2006. Cullman, O. Baptism in the New Testament. London: SCM, 1950. –. The Earliest Christian Confessions. London: Lutterworth, 1949. Culpepper, R. Alan. Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983. Daube, D. The Exodus Pattern in the Bible. London: Faber and Faber, 1963. Davies, W. D. Christian Engagements with Judaism. Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1999. Davis, J. A. “The Interaction between Individual Ethical Conscience and Community Ethical Consciousness in 1 Corinthians.” Horizons in Biblical Theology 10 (1988): 1– 18. Dawes, G. W. “The Danger of Idolatry: First Corinthians 8:7–13.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 58 (1996): 82–98. de Boer, Martinus C. 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. DeLacey, D. R. “‘One Lord’ in Pauline Christology.” In Christ the Lord: Studies in Christology Presented to D. Guthrie. Edited by H. H. Rowden, 191–203. Leicester: InterVarsity Press, 1982. Del Chiaro, Mario A., ed. Corinthiaca: Studies in Honor of Darrell A. Amyx. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1986. DeMaris, Richard E. “Cults and the Imperial Cult in Early Roman Corinth: Literary Versus Material Record.” In Zwischen den Reichen: Neues Testament und Romishe Herrschaft 9, edited by M. Lahbahn and J. Zangenberg, 73–91. Tübingen: Francke Verlag, 2002. Deming, W. “The Unity of 1 Corinthians 5–6.” Journal of Biblical Literature 115 (1996): 289–312. De Vos, Craig Steven. “Stepmothers, Concubines and the Case of ΠΟΡΝΕΙΑ in 1 Corinthians 5.” New Testament Studies 44 (1998): 104–114. Derrett, J. D. M. “‘Handing over to Satan’: an Explanation of 1 Cor 5:1–7.” Revue internationale des droits de l’antiquité 26 (1979): 11–30.

Bibliography

173

Donaldson, Terence. Judaism and the Gentiles: Jewish Patterns of Universalism (to 135 CE). Waco: Baylor University, 2007. Dunn, James D. G. The Theology of Paul the Apostle. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1998. –. “Was Christianity a Monotheistic Faith from the Beginning?” Scottish Journal of Theology 35 (1982): 303–335. Eastman, Brad. Review of Paul and His Story, by Sylvia Keesmaat. Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 30 (2001): 106–07. Edwards, Katherine M. Coins 1826–1929. Corinth 6. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1933. Eichrodt, Walther. Ezekiel. Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1970. Elliger, K. and W. Rudolph, eds. Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1977. Ellis, E. Earle. “A Note on 1 Cor 10:4.” Journal of Biblical Literature 76 (1957): 53–56. –. Paul’s Use of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1981. –. Prophecy and Hermeneutic in Early Christianity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978. –. “Traditions in 1 Corinthians.” New Testament Studies 32 (1986): 481–502. Engels, Donald. Roman Corinth: An Alternative Model for the Classical City. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1990. Enns, Peter E. Review of Paul and His Story, by Silvia Keesmaat. Bulletin for Biblical Research 10 (2000): 151–53. –. “The ‘Moveable Well’ in 1 Cor 10:4: An Extrabiblical Tradition in an Apostolic Text.” Bulletin for Biblical Research 6 (1996): 23–38. Eriksson, A. Traditions as Rhetorical Proof: Pauline Argumentation in 1 Corinthians. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1998. Evans C. A., and J. A. Sanders, eds. Paul and the Scriptures of Israel. Journal for the Study of the New Testament: Supplement Series 83. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993. Eusebius. The Ecclesiastical History. Translated by K. Lake. 2 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1965. Fape, M. O. Paul’s Concept of Baptism and Its Present Implication for Believers. Lewiston: Mellon, 1999. Fee, Gordon. “Εἰδωλοθύτα Once Again: An Interpretation of 1 Corinthians 8–10.” Biblica 61 (1980): 172–197. –. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987. Feldman, Louis H. Flavius Josephus: Translation and Commentary. Edited by S. Mason. Leiden: Brill, 2000. –. Jew and Gentile in the Ancient World: Attitudes and Interactions from Alexander to Justinian. Princeton: Princeton University, 1993. Fishbane, Michael. Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel. Oxford: Clarendon, 1985. –. Text and Texture: Close Readings of Selected Biblical Texts. New York: Schocken Books, 1979. Fisk, Bruce N. Do You Not Remember? Scripture, Story and Exegesis in the Rewritten Bible of Pseudo-Philo. Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha: Supplement Series 37. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 2001. –. “Eating Meat Offered to Idols: Corinthians Behavior and Pauline Response in 1 Corinthians 8–10. A Response to Gordon Fee.” Trinity Theological Journal 10 (1989): 49– 70.

174

Bibliography

Fitzgerald, J. T. Cracks in an Earthen Vessel: An Examination of the Catalogues of Hardships in the Corinthian Correspondence. SBL Dissertation Series 99. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1988. Fitzmyer, Joseph A. First Corinthians. Anchor Yale Bible. New Haven: Yale University, 2008. Fiore, Benjamin. “Passion in Paul and Plutarch: 1 Corinthians 5–6 and the Polemic against Epicureans.” In Greeks, Romans, and Christians: Essays in Honor of Abraham Malherbe. Edited by David L. Balch, Everett Ferguson, and Wayne A. Meeks, 135–143. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990. Foerster, G. “Remains of a Synagogue at Corinth.” Page 185 in Ancient Synagogues Revealed. Edited by Lee I. Levine. Jerusalem: The Israel Exploration Society, 1981. Fotopoulos, John. “Arguments Concerning Food Offered to Idols: Corinthian Quotations and Pauline Refutations in a Rhetorical Partitio (1 Corinthians 8:1–9).” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 67 (2005): 611–631. –. Food Offered to Idols in Roman Corinth: A Social-Rhetorical Reconsideration of 1 Corinthians 8:1–11:1. Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 2003. –. “The Rhetorical Situation, Arrangement, and Argumentation of 1 Corinthians 8:1–13: Insights into Paul’s Instructions on Idol-Food in Greco-Roman Context.” Greek Orthodox Theological Review 47 (2002): 165–198. Fretheim, Terence E. Exodus. Interpretation. Louisville: John Knox Press, 1991. Furnish, Victor Paul. The Theology of 1 Corinthians. New Testament Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1999. Gager, John G. Moses in Greco-Roman Paganism. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1972. Gamble, Harry Y. Books and Readers in the Early Church: A History of Early Christian Texts. New Haven: Yale University, 1995. Gardner, Jane F. Women in Roman Law and Society. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1986. Gardner, P. The Gifts of God and the Authentication of a Christian: An Exegetical Study of 1 Corinthians 8–11. Lanham: University Press of America, 1994. Garland, David E. 1 Corinthians. Baker Exegetical Commentary of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003. Gaventa, Beverly Roberts. Our Mother Saint Paul. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2007. –. “‘You Proclaim the Lord’s Death’: 1 Corinthians 11:26 and Paul’s Understanding of Worship.” Review and Expositor 80 (1983): 377–387. Geertz, Clifford. Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books, 1973. Godet, F. Commentary on St. Paul’s First Epistle to the Corinthians. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1889. Gooch, Peter W. “‘Conscience in 1 Corinthians 8 and 10.” New Testament Studies 33 (1987): 244–254. –. Dangerous Food: 1 Corinthians 8–10 in Its Context. Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1993. –. Partial Knowledge: Philosophical Studies in Paul. Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press, 1987. Goulder, Michael D. “Libertines? (1 Cor 5–6).” Novum Testamentum 41 (1999): 334–348. –. Paul and the Competing Mission in Corinth. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2001. Grant, R. M. Gods and the One God. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1986. Gressman, Hugo. “Η ΚΟΙΝΩΝΙΑ ΤΩΝ ΔΑΙΜΟΝΙΩΝ.” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 20 (1921): 224–230.

Bibliography

175

Gruen, Erich S. Heritage and Hellenism: The Reinvention of Jewish Tradition. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998. Haacker H., and P. Schäfer. “Nach-biblische Traditionem vom Tod des Mose.” In Josephus-Studien: Untersuchungen zu Josephus, dem antiken Judentum und dem Neuen Testament: Otto Mechel z 70sten Geburstag gewidmet. Edited by Otto Betz, Klaus Haacker and Martin Hengel, 147–174. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, 1974. Hafemann, Scott J. Paul, Moses, and the History of Israel: The Letter/Spirit Contrast and the Argument from Scripture in 2 Corinthians 3. Bletchley: Paternoster, 2005. Hagner, Donald A. The Use of the Old and New Testaments in Clement of Rome. Novum Testamentum Supplements 34. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1973. Hahn, F. Theologie des Neuen Testaments. Band II: Die Einheit des Neuen Testaments. Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 2002. Halbwachs, Maurice. On Collective Memory. Edited by and translated by L. A. Coser. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992. Hanson, A.T. Studies in Paul’s Technique and Theology. London: SPCK, 1974. Harris, B. F. “συνείδησις (Conscience) in the Pauline Writings.” Westminster Theological Journal 24 (1962): 173–186. Hartog, P. “‘Not Even Among the Pagans’ (1 Cor 5:1): Paul and Seneca on Incest.” In The New Testament and Early Christian Literature in Greco-Roman Context: Studies in Honor of David E. Aune, edited by John Fotopoulos, 51–64. Leiden: Brill, 2006. Havener, Ivan. “A Curse for Salvation – 1 Corinthians 5:1–5.” In Sin, Salvation, and the Spirit, edited by D. Durken, 334–344. Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1979. Hay, David M. “Moses Through New Testament Spectacles.” Interpretation 44 (1990): 240–252. Haykin, A. G. “‘In the Cloud and in the Sea’: Basil of Caesarea and the Exegesis of 1 Cor 10:2.” Vigilae christianae 40 (1986): 135–144. Hays, Richard B. Conversion of the Imagination: Paul as Interpreter of Israel’s Scripture. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005. –. “The Conversion of the Imagination.” New Testament Studies 45 (1999): 391–412. –. Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul. New Haven: Yale, 1989. –. 1 Corinthians. Interpretation. Louisville: John Knox, 1997. Heil, John Paul. The Rhetorical Role of Scripture in 1 Corinthians. Studies in Biblical Literature 15. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2005. Hendel, Ronald S. “The Exodus in Biblical Memory.” Journal of Biblical Literature 120 (2001): 601–22. Héring, J. The First Epistle of Saint Paul to the Corinthians. Translated by A. W. Heathcote and P. J. Allcock. London: Epworth, 1962. Hickling, C. J. A. “Paul’s Use of Exodus.” In The Corinthians Correspondence, edited by R. Bieringer, 367–376. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1996. Holmes, Michael W., ed. The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999. Homer, The Iliad. Translated by Robert Fagles. London: Penguin Classics, 1998. Hooker, M. D. “Adam Redivivus: Philippians 2 Once More.” In The Old Testament in the New Testament: Essays in Honor of J. L. North, edited by Steve Moyise, 220–234. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 2000. Horrell, David G. The Social Ethos of the Corinthians Correspondence. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1996. –. Solidarity and Difference: A Contemporary Reading of Paul’s Ethics. London: T & T Clark, 2005.

176

Bibliography

–. “Theological Principle or Christological Praxis?” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 67 (1997): 83–114. Horsley, Richard A. 1 Corinthians. Abingdon New Testament Commentary. Nashville: Abingdon, 1998. –. “The Background of the Confessional Formula in 1 Cor 8:6.” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 69 (1978): 130–135. –. “Consciousness and Freedom among the Corinthians: 1 Corinthians 9–10.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 40 (1978): 574–589. –. “Gnosis in Corinth: 1 Corinthians 8:1–6.” New Testament Studies 27 (1980): 32–51. –. 1 Corinthians. Abingdon New Testament Commentary. Nashville: Abingdon, 1998. Howard, J. K. “‘Christ our Passover:’ A Study of the Passover-Exodus Theme in 1 Corinthians.” Evangelical Quarterly 41 (1969): 97–108. Hughes, Robert Bruce. “Textual and Hermeneutical Aspects of Paul’s Use of the Old Testament in 1 and 2 Corinthians.” Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Edinburgh, 1978. Hurd, J. C. The Origin of 1 Corinthians. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1983. Hurtado, Larry W. One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988. Jacobs, Lambert D. “Establishing a New Value System in Corinth: 1 Corinthians 5–6 as Persuasive Argument.” In The Rhetorical Analysis of Scripture: Essays from the 1995 London Conference, edited by S. E. Porter and T. H. Olbricht, 347–387. Journal for the Study of the New Testament: Supplement Series 146. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1997. Jaegar, Werner. Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture. Translated by G. Highlet. New York: Oxford University Press, 1939. Jeremias, Joachim. Eucharistic Words of Jesus. London: SCM, 1966. –. Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus: An Investigation into Economic and Social Conditions during the New Testament Period. Translated by F. H. and C. H. Cave. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1969. Jonker, Gerdien. The Topography of Remembrance: The Dead, Tradition and Collective Memory in Mesopotamia. Numen 68. Leiden: Brill, 1995. Josephus, Flavius. Flavii Iosephi opera. Edited by B. Niese. Berlin: Weidmann, 1892. Josephus. Translated by H. St. J. Thackeray et al. 10 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926–1965. Joy, N. J. “Is the Body Really to Be Destroyed? (1 Corinthians 5:5).” The Biblical Translator 39 (1988): 429–36. Käsemann, Ernst. New Testament Questions of Today. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969. –. Essays on New Testament Themes. London: SCM, 1964. Keener, Craig. 1–2 Corinthians. The New Cambridge Bible Commentary. New York: Cambridge University, 2005. Keesmaat, Sylvia C. Paul and his Story: (Re)Interpreting the Exodus Tradition. Journal for the Study of the New Testament: Supplement Series 181. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999. Kelber, Werner H. “The Works of Memory: Christian Origins as MnemoHistory—A Response.” In Memory, Tradition, and Text: Uses of the Past in Early Christianity. Semeia Studies, edited by A. Kirk and T. Thatcher, 221–248. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2005. Kempthorne, R. “Incest and the Body of Christ.” New Testament Studies 14 (1968): 568– 574.

Bibliography

177

King, Fergus J. More Than a Passover: Inculturation in the Supper Narratives of the New Testament. New Testament Studies in Contextual Exegesis 3. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2007. Lampe, G. W. H. “Church Discipline and the Interpretation of the Epistles to the Corinthians.” Christian History and Interpretation: Studies Presented to John Knox. Edited by W. F. Farmer, C. F. D. Moule and R. R. Niebuhr; Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1967. Lietzmann, Hans. An die Korinther. Handbuch zum Neuen Testament 9. Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 1949. Kirk, Alan. “Social and Cultural Memory.” In Memory, Tradition, and Text: Uses of the Past in Early Christianity. Semeia Studies, edited by A. Kirk and T. Thatcher, 1–24. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2005. Kistemaker, Simon. “‘Deliver this Man to Satan’ (1 Cor 5:5): A Case Study in Church Discipline.” Master’s Seminary Journal 3 (1992): 33–46. Kittel, G. and G. Friedrich, eds. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. Translated by G. W. Bromiley. 10 vols. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964–1976. Klauck, Hans-Josef. “Eucharistie und Kirchengemeinschaft bei Paulus.” Gemeinde, Amt, Sakrament: Neutestamentliche Perspektive. Würzburg: Echter Verlag, 1989. –. The Religious Context of Early Christianity: A Guide to Graeco-Roman Religions. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003. Koch, Dietrich-Alex. Die Schrift als Zeuge des Evangeliums: Untersuchungen zur Verwendung und zum Verständnis der Schrift bei Paulus. Beiträge zur historischen Theologie 69. Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 1986. Koet, Bart J. “The Old Testament Background to 1 Cor 10,7–8.” In Corinthian Correspondence, edited by R. Bieringer, 607–615. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1996. Kreitzer, L. “1 Corinthians 10:4 and Philo’s Flinty Rock.” Communio Viatorum 35 (1993): 109–126. Lambrecht, Jan. “Paul’s Christological Use of Scripture in 1 Cor 15:20–28.” New Testament Studies 28 (1982): 502–27. Langston, Scott M. Exodus Through the Centuries. Blackwell Bible Commentaries. Malden, MA / Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2006. Lanier, David E. “With Stammering Lips and Another Tongue: 1 Cor 14:20–22 and Isa 28:11–12.” Criswell Theological Review 5 (1991): 259–85. Levinskaya, Irina. The Book of Acts in Its Diaspora Setting. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996. Lierman, John. The New Testament Moses: Christian Perceptions of Moses and Israel in the Setting of Jewish Religion. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 173. Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 2004. Lietzmann, Hans. An die Korinther. Handbuch zum Neuen Testament 9. Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 1949. Lieu, Judith. Christian Identity in the Jewish and Graeco-Roman World. Oxford: University Press, 2004. –. Neither Jew nor Greek: Constructing Early Christianity. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 2002. Lindemann, Andreas. “Die Schrift als Tradition: Beobachtungen zu den biblischen Zitaten im Ersten Korintherbrief.” In Schrift und Tradition: Festschrift für Josef Ernst zum 70. Geburtstag, edited by Knut Backhaus and Franz Georg Untergassmair, 199–225. Paderborn: Schöningh, 1996.

178

Bibliography

Lona, Horacio E. Der erste Clemensbrief. Kommentar zu den Apostolischen Vätern 2. Göttingen: Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998. Longenecker, Bruce W. Narrative Dynamics in Paul: A Critical Assessment. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002. –. Review of Paul and His Story, by Sylvia Keesmaat. Evangelical Quarterly 73 (2001): 351–53. Lucian. Translated by A. M. Harmon et al. 8 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1913–1967. MacLeod, M.D., trans. Lucian: A Selection. Warminster: Aris & Phillips, 1991. MacDonald, Margaret Y. The Pauline Churches: A Socio-historical Study of Institutionalisation in the Pauline and Deutero-Pauline Writings. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 60. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. Malan, François S. “The Use of the Old Testament in 1 Corinthians.” Neotestimentica 14 (1981): 134–170. Marrou, H. I. A History of Education in Antiquity. Translated by George Lamb. London: Sheed and Ward, 1956. Marshall, P. Enmity in Corinth: Social Conventions in Paul’s Relations with the Corinthians. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Alten und Neuen Testament 2:23. Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 1987. Martin, Dale B. The Corinthian Body. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995. Martínez, Florentino García and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar, eds. The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition. 2 vols. Leiden: Brill / Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997. Martyn, J. Louis. “Epilogue: An Essay in Pauline Meta-Ethics.” In Divine and Human Agency in Paul and His Cultural Environment, edited by J. M. G Barclay and S. J. Gathercole, 173–183. London: T & T Clark, 2006. –. Galatians. Anchor Bible 33A. New York: Doubleday, 1997. McDermot, M. “The Biblical Doctrine of Koinonia.” Biblische Zeitschrift 19 (1975): 64– 77. McEwen, A. “Paul’s Use of the Old Testament in 1 Corinthians 10:1–4.” Vox Reformata 47 (1986): 3–10. Mchami, Ronilick E. K. “Paul’s Use of the Instruction of the Mosaic Law in his Paraenesis: 1 Thessalonians 4:1–8.” Africa Theological Journal 29 (2006): 74–90. McMullen, Ramsay. Paganism in the Roman Empire. New Haven: Yale, 1981. Meeks, Wayne A. “‘And Rose Up to Play’: Midrash and Paraenesis in 1 Corinthians 10:1– 22.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 16 (1982): 64–78. –. First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul. New Haven: Yale, 2003. –. The Moral World of the First Christians. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986. –. The Prophet King: Moses Traditions and the Johannine Christology. Leiden: Brill, 1967. Meggitt, J. J. “Meat Consumption and Social Conflict in Corinth.” Journal of Theological Studies 45 (1994): 137–141. –. Paul, Poverty and Survival. Endinburgh: T & T Clark, 1998. Merklein, H. “Die Einheitlichkeit des ersten Korintherbriefes.” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 75 (1984): 153–83. Metzger, Bruce. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. Stuttgart: United Bible Society, 1971. Meyers, Carol. Exodus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

Bibliography

179

Millard, A. R. “Covenant and Communion in First Corinthians.” In Apostolic History and the Gospel: In Honour of F. F. Bruce. Edited by W. Gasque and R. P. Martin, 242–248. Exeter: Paternoster, 1970. Miller, Colin. “The Imperial Cult in the Pauline Cities of Asia Minor and Greece.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 72 (2010): 314–332. Miller, Patrick. Deuteronomy. Interpretation; Louisville: John Knox, 1990. Minear, Paul S. “Christ and the Congregation: 1 Corinthians 5–6.” Review and Expositor 80 (1983): 341–350. Mitchell, A. C. “Rich and Poor in the Courts of Corinth: Litigiousness and Status in 1 Cor 6:1–11.” New Testament Studies 39 (1993): 562–586. Mitchell, Margaret. Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1991. –. Paul, the Corinthians and the Birth of Christian Hermeneutics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. Mitton, C. L. “New Wine in Old Wine Skins: IV. Leaven.” Expository Times 84 (1972/73): 339–343. Morris, L. The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1958. Moule, C.F.D. “The Judgment Theme in the Sacraments.” In The Background of the New Testament and Its Eschatology: In Honour of C. H. Dodd, edited by Davies and Daube, 464–481. Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1956. Moyise, Steve, and Maarten J. H. Menken. Deuteronomy in the New Testament: The New Testament and the Scriptures of Israel. London: T & T Clark, 2008. Moyise, Steve. Evoking Scripture: Seeing the Old Testament in the New. London: T & T Clark, 2008. –. Paul and Scripture. London: SPCK, 2010. –. The Old Testament in the New: An Introduction. New York: Continuum, 2001. Murphy, Frederick J. Pseudo-Philo: Rewriting the Bible. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993. Murphy-O’Connor, Jerome. “Food and Spiritual Gifts in 1 Corinthians 8:8.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 41 (1979): 292–298. –. “1 Cor viii,6 – Cosmology or Soteriology?” Revue biblique 85 (1978): 253–267. –. “Freedom or the Ghetto (1 Cor VIII:1–13; X:23–XI:1).” Revue biblique 85 (1978): 541–574. –. St. Paul’s Corinth: Texts and Archaeology. Collegeville: the Liturgical Press, 2002. Neufeld, V. H. Earliest Christian Confessions. Leiden: Brill, 1963. Newton, Derek. Deity and Diet: The Dilemma of Sacrificial Food at Corinth. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1998. –. “Food Offered to Idols in 1 Corinthians 8–10.” Tyndale Bulletin 49.1 (1998): 179–182. Obenhaus, Stacy. “Sanctified Entirely: The Theological Focus of Paul’s Instructions for Church Discipline.” Restoration Quarterly 43 (2001): 1–12. Oropeza, B. J. “Laying to Rest the Midrash: Paul’s Message on Meat Sacrificed to Idols in Light of the Deuteronomic Tradition.” Biblica 79 (1998): 57–68. –. Paul and Apostasy. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 115. Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 2000. Osten–Sacken, P. von der. “Die Tora in 1 Kor 10:1–13.” In Die Heiligkeit der Tora. Studien zum Gesetz bei Paulus, 60–86. Munich: Kaiser, 1989. Oster, R. E., “Use, Misuse and Neglect of Archaeological Evidence in Some Modern Works on 1 Corinthians (1 Cor 7:1–5; 8:10; 11:2–16; 12:14–26).” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 83 (1992): 52–73.

180

Bibliography

Ostmeyer, K. H. “Typologie und Typos: Analyse eines schwierigen Verhältnisses.” New Testament Studies 46 (2000): 112–131. Outka, G. “On Harming Others.” Interpretation 34 (1980): 381–393. Overman, J. Andrew, and Robert S. MacLennan, eds. Diaspora Jews and Judaism: Essays in Honor of, and in Dialogue with, A. Thomas Kraabel. Studies in the History of Judaism. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992. Parry, R. St. John. The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians. London: Epworth, 1962. Pascuzzi, Maria. Ethics, Ecclesiology and Church Discipline: A Rhetorical Analysis of 1 Corinthians 5. Rome: Gregorian University Press, 1997. Pate, C. Marvin. The Reverse of the Curse: Paul, Wisdom, and the Law. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 114. Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 2000. Pathrapankal, Joseph. “1 Corinthians.” In Global Bible Commentary, edited by Daniel Patte, 444–450. Nashville: Abingdon, 2004. Penna, Romano. Paul the Apostle: A Theological and Exegetical Study Wisdom and Folly of the Cross. 2 vols. Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1996. Perrot, C. “Les examples du désert (1 Cor 10:6–11).” New Testament Studies 29 (1983): 437–452. Philo. Translated by F. H. Colson and G. H. Whitaker. 10 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1929–1953. Phua, Richard Liong-Seng. Idolatry and Authority: A Study of 1 Corinthians 8:1–11:1 in the Light of the Jewish Diaspora. Library of New Testament Studies/Journal for the Study of the New Testament: Supplement Series 299. London: T & T Clark, 2005. Pickett, Raymond. The Cross in Corinth: The Social Significance of the Death of Jesus. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997. Porter, C. L. “An Interpretation of Paul’s Lord’s Supper Texts: 1 Cor 10:14–22 and 11:17– 34.” Encounter 50 (1989): 29–45. Porter, Stanley E., and Christopher D. Stanley. As It Is Written: Studying Paul’s Use of Scripture. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008. Price, S. R. F. Rituals and Power: The Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor. Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1996. Probst, H. Paulus und der Brief: Die Rhetorik des antiken Briefes als Form der paulinischen Korintherkorrespondenz (1 Kor 8–10). Wissenschafltiche Untersuchungen zum Alten und Neuen Testament 2:45. Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 1991. Prosic, Tamara. “Origin of Passover.” Scandanavian Journal of the Old Testament 13 (June 1999): 78–95. Pucci, Joseph. The Full-Knowing Reader: Allusion and the Power of the Reader in the Western Literary Tradition. New Haven: Yale, 1998. Rahlfs, Alfred, ed. Septuaginta: Id est Vetus Testamentum Graece iuxta LXX interpretes. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1979. Ramsaran, R. A. Liberating Words: Paul’s Use of Rhetorical Maxims in 1 Cor 1–10. Falley Forge: Trinity Press International, 1996. Richardson, N. Paul’s Language about God. Journal for the Study of the New Testament: Supplement Series 99. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994. Ricoeur, Paul. Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences: Essays on Language, Action and Interpretation. Edited by J. B. Thompson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. Robertson A., and A. Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians. 2nd Edition. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1978.

Bibliography

181

Robinson, Betsey A. “Fountains and the Formation of Cultural Identity.” In Urban Religion in Roman Corinth: Interdisciplinary Approaches, edited by Daniel N. Schowalter and Steven J. Friesen, 111–140. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2005. Robinson, Henry S, ed. Ancient Corinth: A Guide to the Excavations, 6th ed. rev. Princeton: American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 1960. Roehrs Walter R. “The Typological Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament.” Concordia Journal 10 (1984): 204–216. Roetzel, C. J. Judgement in the Community: A Study in the Relationship between Eschatology and Ecclesiology in Paul. Leiden: Brill, 1972. Rosner, Brian S. “Deuteronomy in 1 and 2 Corinthians.” In Deuteronomy in the New Tsetament: The New Testament and the Scriptures of Israel. Library of New Testament Studies 358, edited by M. J. J. Menken and S. Moyise, 118–135. London: T & T Clark, 2008. –. “‘Drive out the wicked person’: A Biblical Theology of Exclusion.” Evangelical Quarterly 71 (1999): 25–36. –. “‘No Other Gods’ The Jealousy of God and Religious Pluralism.” In One God, One Lord: Christianity in a World of Religious Pluralism. Edited by A. D. Clarke and B. W. Winter, 149–159. Grand Rapids: Paternoster, 1992. –. “‘ΟΥΧΙ ΜΑΛΛΟΝ ΕΠΕΝΘΗΖΑΤΕ’ Corporate Responsibility in 1 Corinthians 5.” New Testament Studies 38 (1992): 470–473. –. Paul, Scripture and Ethics: A Study of 1 Corinthians 5–7. Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 22. Leiden: Brill, 1994. –. “Temple eer than He? The Strength of 1 Corinthians 10:22b.” Tyndale Bulletin 43 (1992): 171–179. –. “Temple and Holiness in 1 Cor. 5.” Tyndale Bulletin 42 (1991): 137–145. –. “The Function of Scripture in 1 Cor 5,13b and 6,16.” In The Corinthian Correspondence, edited by R. Bieringer, 513–518. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1996. – ed. Understanding Paul’s Ethics: Twentieth-Century Approaches. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995. Rowe, C. Kavin. World Upside Down: Reading Acts in the Graeco-Roman Age. New York: Oxford, 2009. Ruden, Sarah. Paul Among the People: The Apostle Reinterpreted and Reimagined in His Own Time. New York: Pantheon, 2010. Sacchi, Paolo. The History of the Second Temple Period. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament: Supplement Series 285. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000. Sandelin, K. G. “‘Do Not Be Idolaters!’ (1 Cor 10:7).” In Texts and Contexts. Biblical Texts in Their Textual and Situational Contexts. Festschrift L. Hartman, edited by T. Fornberg and D. Hellholm, 257–273. Oslo: Scandinavian University Press, 1995. Sanders, Boykin. “1 Corinthians.” In True to Our Native Land: An African American New Testament Commentary, edited by Brian K. Blount, 276–306. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007. Sanders, E. P. Judiasm: Practice and Belief 63 BCE–66 CE. London: SCM Press, 1992. –. Paul and Palestinian Judaism. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1977. Schenk, W. “Der 1. Korintherbrief als Briefsammlung.” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 60 (1969): 219–43. Schmithals, W. “Die Korintherbriefe als Briefsammlung.” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 64 (1973): 263–88. –. Gnosticism in Corinth: An Investigation of the Letters to the Corinthians. Translated by John E. Steely. Nashville: Abingdon, 1971.

182

Bibliography

Schnackenburg, R. Baptism in the Thought of St. Paul. Oxford: Blackwell, 1964. Schubert, Paul. Form and Function of the Pauline Thanksgivings. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift Für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 20. Berlin: Verlag von Alfred Töpelmann, 1939. Sebothoma, W. A. “κοινωνία in 1 Corinthians 10:16.” Neotestimentica 24 (1990): 63–69. Shillington, V. George. “Atonement Texture in 1 Corinthians 5.5.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 71 (1998): 29–50. Shils, Edward. Tradition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981. Sigal, P. “Another Note to 1 Cor 10:16.” New Testament Studies 29 (1983): 134–139. Silva, M. “Galatians.” In Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, edited by G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson, 785–812. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007. Skarsaune, Oskar. In the Shadow of the Temple: Jewish Influences on Early Christianity. Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 2002. Smit, Joop F. M. “About the Idol Offerings”: Rhetoric, Social Context and Theology of Paul’s Discourse in First Corinthians 8:1–11:1. Contributions to Biblical Exegesis & Theology 27. Leuven: Peeters, 2000. –. “‘Do Not Be Idolaters’: Paul’s Rhetoric in First Corinthians 10:1–22.” Novum Testamentum 39 (1997): 40–53. –. “1 Cor. 8:1–6: A Rhetorical Partitio. A Contribution to the Coherence of 1 Cor. 8:1– 11:1.” In The Corinthian Correspondence. Edited by R. Bieringer, 577–591. Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1996. –. “The Rhetorical Disposition of First Corinthians 8:7–9:29.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 59 (1997): 476–492. –. “‘That Someone Has the Wife of His Father:’ Paul’s Argumentation in 1 Cor 5:1–13.” Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 80 (2004): 131–143. –. “‘You Shall Not Muzzle a Threshing Ox’: Paul’s Use of the Law of Moses in 1 Cor 9,8–12.” Estudios bíblicos 58 (2000): 239–263. Smith, Jonathan Z. To Take Place: Toward Theory in Ritual. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987. Smith, Mark S. “Remembering God: Collective Memory in Israelite Religion.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 64 (2002): 631–651. Söding, T. “Eucharistie und Mysterien: Urchristliche Herrenmalstheologie und antike Mysterienreligiosität im Spiegel von 1 Kor 10.” Bibel und Kirche 45 (1990): 140–145. –. “Starke und Schwache der Götzenopferstreit in 1 Kor 8–10 als Paradigma paulinischer Ethik.” Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 85 (1994): 69–142. Songer, H. S. “Problems Arising from the Worship of Idols: 1 Corinthians 8:1–11:1.” Review and Expositor 80 (1983): 363–375. Soulen, R. Kendall. The God of Israel and Christian Theology. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996. South, James T. “A Critique of the ‘Curse/Death’ Interpretation of 1 Corinthians 5.1–8.” New Testament Studies 39 (1993): 539–561. Stanley, Christopher. Arguing with Scripture: The Rhetoric of Quotations in the Letters of Paul. New York: T & T Clark, 2004. –. Paul and the Language of Scripture: Citation Technique in the Pauline Epistles and Contemporary Literature. Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 74. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

Bibliography

183

–. “Paul’s ‘Use’ of Scripture: Why the Audience Matters.” In As It Is Written: Studying Paul’s Use of Scripture, edited by Stanley E. Porter and Christopher D. Stanley, 125– 156. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008. –. “Pearls Before Swine”: Did Paul’s Audiences Understand his Biblical Quotations?” Novum Testamentum 41 (1999): 124–34. Steele, E. Springs. “The Use of Jewish Scriptures in 1 Thessalonians.” Biblical Theology Bulletin 14 (1984): 12–17. Stewart-Sykes, Alistair. The Lamb’s High Feast: Melito, Peri Pascha and the Quartodeciman Paschal Liturgy at Sardis. London: Brill, 1998. Still, E. Coye. “Paul’s Aims Regarding ΕΙΔΩΛΟΘΥΤΑ: A New Proposal for Interpreting 1 Corinthians 8:1–11:1.” Novum Testamentum 44 (2002): 332–343. Still, Todd. And David G. Horrell. After the First Urban Christians: The Social-Scientific Study of Pauline Christianity Twenty-Five Years Later. London: T & T Clark, 2009. Strabo. The Geography of Strabo. Translated by Horace Leonard Jones. 8 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1917–1932. Talbert, Charles H. Reading Corinthians: A Literary and Theological Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians. New York: Crossroad, 1987. Tertullian. Apology. Translated by T. R. Glover. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1931. Theissen, Gerd. The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity: Essays on Corinth. Edited by and translated by John H. Schütz. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1982. Thiselton, A. C. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000. Thiselton, A. “The Meaning of Σάρξ in 1 Corinthians 5.5: A Fresh Approach in the Light of Logical and Semantic Factors.” Scottish Journal of Theology 26 (1973): 204–28. Thrall, M. E. The First and Second Letters of Paul to the Corinthians. Cambridge Bible Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1965. Tomson, Peter J. Paul and the Jewish Law: Halakah in the Letters of the Apostle to the Gentiles. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990. Tuckett, Christopher. “Paul, Scripture and Ethics: Some Reflections.” New Testament Studies 46 (2000): 403–24. Turcan, Robert. The Cults of the Roman Empire. Oxford: Blackwell, 1992. Ulonska, H. “Die Funktion der alttestamentlichen Zitate und Anspielungen in den paulinischen Briefen.” Ph.D. Dissertation. Münster, 1964. Vanbeck, A. “La discipline pénitentielle dans les écrits de Saint Paul.” Revue d’histoire et de littérature religieuses 1 (1910): 244–46. Vander Broek, L. Breaking Barrier: The Possibilities of Christian Community in a Lonely World. Grand Rapids: Brazos, 2002. Wagenaar, Jan A. “Passover and the First Day of the Festival of Unleavened Bread in the Priestly Festival Calendar.” Vetus Testamentum 54 (April 2004): 250–268. Wagner, J. Ross. Heralds of the Good News: Isaiah and Paul “in Concert” in the Letter to the Romans. Leiden: Brill, 2002. Walbank, Mary E. Hoskins. “Aspects of Corinthian Coinage in the Late First and Early Second Centuries A.D.” Pages 337–349 in Corinth, The Centenary 1896–1996. Corinth 20. The American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 2003. –. “The Foundation and Planning of Early Roman Corinth,” Journal of Roman Archaeology 10 (1997): 95–130. Walker, W. O. Interpolations in the Pauline Letters. London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001.

184

Bibliography

Wansbrough, H. “Jewish Methods of Exegesis in the New Testament.” Studien zum Neuen Testament und seiner Umwelt 25 (2000): 219–244. Waters, Guy. The End of Deuteronomy in the Epistles of Paul. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 221. Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 2006. Watson, Alan, ed. The Digest of Justinian. 2 vols. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1998. Watson, D. F. “1 Corinthians 10:23–11:1 in the Light of Greco-Roman Rhetoric: The Role of Rhetorical Questions.” Journal of Biblical Literature 108 (1989): 301–318. Watson, Francis. Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith. London: T & T Clark, 2004. –. “Scripture in Pauline Theology: How Far Down Does It Go?” Journal of Theological Interpretation 2 (2008): 181–192. Watts, Rikki E. Isaiah’s New Exodus in Mark. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1997. Wedderburn, J. M. Baptism and Resurrection: Studies in Pauline Theology Against Its Greco-Roman Background. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 44. Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 1987. Weima, J. A. D. “1 and 2 Thessalonians.” In Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old, edited by G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson, 871–890. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007. Weiss, Johannes. Der erste Korintherbrief. Göttingen, Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1910. Welborn, L. L. Politics and Rhetoric in the Corinthian Epistles. Macon: Mercer University Press, 1997. Wenthe, D. O. “An Exegetical Study of 1 Cor. 5:7b.” The Spring Fielder 38 (1974): 134– 140. Whitmarsh, Tim. Greek Literature and the Roman Empire: The Politics of Imitation. London: Oxford University Press, 2001. Widengren, George. “Myth and History in Israelite-Jewish Thought.” In Culture in History: Essays in Honor of Paul Radin, edited by S. Diamond, 467–495. New York: Octagon Books, 1981. Wilk, F. Die Bedeutung des Jesajabuches für Paulus. Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments 179. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998. Williams, Charles K. “A Re-evaluation of Temple E and the West End of the Forum of Corinth.” In The Greek Renaissance in the Roman Empire: Papers from the Tenth British Museum Classical Colloquium, edited by Susan Walker and Averil Cameron, 156– 162. London : University of London, Institute of Classical Studies, 1989. –. “Corinth and the Cult of Aphrodite.” In Corinthiaca: Studies in Honor of Darell A. Amyx, edited by Mario A. Del Chiaro, 12–24. Columbia: University of Missouri, 1986. –. “The Refounding of Corinth: Some Roman Religious Attitudes.” In Roman Architecture in the Greek World, edited by Sarah Macready and F. H. Thompson, 26–37. Occasional Papers 10. The Society of Antiquaries of London; London: Alard and Son, 1987. Williams, H. H. Drake. The Wisdom of the Wise: The Presence and Function of Scripture within 1 Cor. 1:19–3:23. Arbeiten zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 49. Leiden: Brill, 2001. Willis, Wendell Lee. Idol Meat in Corinth: The Pauline Argument in 1 Corinthians 8 and 10. Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series 68. Chico: Scholars Press, 1981. Wills, L. “The Form of the Sermon in Hellenistic Judaism and Early Christianity.” Harvard Theological Review 77 (1984): 277–99. Winter, Bruce. “The Achaean Federal Imperial Cult II: The Corinthian Church.” Tyndale Bulletin 46 (1995): 169–178.

Bibliography

185

–. After Paul Left Corinth: The Influence of Secular Ethics and Social Change. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001. –. “In Public and in Private: Early Christians and Religious Pluralism.” In One God, One Lord, edited by A. D. Clarke and B. W. Winter, 125–148. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992. –. Seek the Welfare of the City: Christians as Benefactors and Citizens. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994. –. “Theological and Ethical Response to Religious Pluralism: 1 Cor 8–10.” Tyndale Bulletin 42.2(1990): 209–226. Witherington, Ben. Conflict and Community in Corinth: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995. –. “Not So Idle Thoughts About EIDOLOTHUTON.” Tyndale Bulletin 44.2 (1993): 237– 254. –. “Why Not Idol Meat? Is It What You Eat or Where You Eat It?” Bible Review 10 (1994): 38–43, 54–55. Wolff, C. Der erste Brief des Paulus an die Korinther. Theologischer Handkommentar zum Neuen Testament 7. Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1996. Yeo, Khiok-Khung. Rhetorical Interaction in 1 Corinthians 8 and 10: A Formal Analysis with Preliminary Suggestions for a Chinese, Cross Cultural Hermeneutic. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1995. Zaas, Peter S. “‘Cast Out the Evil Man from Your Midst’ (1 Cor 5:13b).” Journal of Biblical Literature 103 (1984): 259–267. –. “Catalogues and Context: 1 Corinthians 5 and 6.” New Testament Studies 34 (1988): 622–629.

Index of Ancient Sources Hebrew Bible/Septuagint Exodus 1–15 3:3–7 3:7–22 4:1–17 4:29 5:1–3 5:22–23 6:1–12 6:2–9 7:1–5 7:14–18 8:1 8:5 8:8 8:12–13 8:16 8:20–23 8:30 9:1–4 9:13–19 9:16 10:1–2 10:21–23 11:1–10 12 12:1–20 12:8–11 12:11–14 12:12 12:12–20 12:14–20 12:15 12:17 12:19 12:20 12:21

38, 42 38, 42, 57 38, 42 57 57 57 57 57 38, 42 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 57 82 57 57 57 137, 142 139 140 142 38 133 140 134, 136, 142 134, 137, 140 134, 136 142 140

12:23 12:26–27 12:28 12:40–51 12:43 12:48 13:14–16 13:21–22 14:13–14 14:14 14:18 14:19–20 14:21–29 15:1–18 15:26 16:4 16:6–8 16:8 16:12 17:1–7 17:3 17:5–7 19:1–25 19:5–8 19:16–25 20:1–21 20:5 24:15–18 32 32:1 32:4 32:4–5 32:5 32:6 32:7 32:8

76 36, 37, 40, 140, 155 57 139 146 146 140 48, 60 57 82 82 48, 60 54, 60 57 39, 43 39, 43, 62 57 62 62 61 76 62 57 39, 43 61 39, 43 115 61 9, 14, 16, 56, 69, 71, 72, 81, 99, 122, 138 81, 82 81, 82, 100 100 81 81, 87 81, 82 82

188

Index of Ancient Sources

32:10 32:11 32:12 32:13 32:25 32:32 33:7–11 33:7–23 33:10 33:12–16 33:13–14 33:15–16 33:17–23 34:14 34:25 40:13–17 40:34–38

56, 82 55, 56, 82 82 56 82 56 48, 60 57 61 60 56 61 61 115 140 48 60

Leviticus 7:5–8 11:44 16:2 17:11–13 18:18 23 23:4–8 23:5–8

99 142 61 140 126 154 148 139

Numbers 9:1–14 9:13 10:36 11:1 11:1–35 11:4 11:20 11:34 14 14:11 14:12 14:13 14:13–17 14:15–16 14:16 14:16–17 14:17 14:17–19 14:20–24 14:27

139, 146, 148 38 60 76 62, 70 70 70 70 65, 76, 82, 118, 119 70, 76 76, 83 118 60 83 118, 119 118 118 83 118 76

14:28–38 14:29 14:29–30 16 16:1–35 16:5 16:6 16:11 16:24 16:27 16:28–33 16:41 17:5 20:2–11 20:7–11 21 21:4–5 21:6–7 23:9 25 25:9 26:62 28:16–25

76 76 83 76 77 76 76 76 154 154 76 76 76 61 62 75 76 75 60 73 73 73 139

Deuteronomy 5:9 5:22 5:24–27 5:26 7:12–26 8:1–8 8:3 8:15 8:18 9:12–29 9:26–29 11:1–9 13:5 13:12–18 16:1–8 16:1–11 16:2–3 16:3 17:2–7 17:7 17:12–13 18:1–5 19:19 19:19–20

115 48, 60, 61 61 61 32 32 62 62 93 82 32 32 153 153 37, 140, 148 139 143 134 153 152, 153 153 99 153 153

189

Index of Ancient Sources 21:18–21 21:21 22 22:21 22:22 22:24 23:1 24:7 27:20 29:2–9 30:15–20 31:14–15 32

32:26 32:26–27 32:30–31 32:36 32:37 32:37–38 32:39 32:39–43 32:46–47

153 153 153 153 153 153 126, 153 153 126 38 38 61 116, 117, 118, 119, 120 117 38 32 117 117 117, 119 117 111, 117 119 117, 119 32, 114, 116, 117, 120 118, 119 84 117 119 119 119, 120 119 119 120

Joshua 3:5–17 4:18–24 5.10–11 5:24 7 7:1 24:19–20

32 32 33, 37 32 154 154 115

Judges 2:11 8:34

32 93

32:4 32:7–14 32:8–9 32:12 32:13 32:15 32:16–18 32:17 32:19–26 32:20 32:21

1 Samuel 12:6

32

1 Kings 12:28 14:22

81 115

2 Kings 22–23

141

2 Chronicles 29–30 29:20–36 30:16–20

141 141 142

Psalms 22:7 77:16–18 78 78:2–4 78:5 78:7 78:8 78:11 78:11–12 78:13 78:14 78:15–16 78:18 78:18–20 78:21–31 78:22 78:23–29 78:30 78:31 78:34 78:35 78:37 78:41 78:41–43 78:42–43 78:56 78:56–57 78:57–59 78:58 78:58–64 78:59–67 105:39 105:41

93 48, 60 32, 67, 70 67 67 67 68, 70, 75 68 67 67 48, 60, 67 61, 67 75, 76 67 62 70 67 67 67 67 67, 68 75 75, 76 67 68 75, 76 67 67 67 115 67 60 61

190

Index of Ancient Sources

106 106:1 106:2 106:5 106:6 106:7 106:7–8 106:13 106:14 106:16–18 106:19 106:20–21 106:21 106:21–22 106:23 106:24 106:25 106:26 106:28 106:29 106:35–36 106:36–38 106:37 106:40 115:4–8

77, 83 83 83 83 67 67 83 67, 83 70, 75, 77 77 72 70 67, 77 83 76, 77 77 76, 77 77 77 115 77 111 77 67 115

53:12 60:1–3

94 35, 38

Jeremiah 10:2–5 14:1–6 14:1–10 14:7 14:9 16:14–15 23:7–8 32:16

115 83 83 83, 84 83, 84 32 32 32

Ezekiel 20:1–44 20:9 20:9–12 20:14 20:22 20:36–37 20:41–42 20:42 20:44 30:36–37 45:18–25 45:21–25

83 83 83 83 83 34, 37 83 34, 37 83 32 140 139, 148

Isaiah 11:11–16 19:16–25 19:19–25 41:14 41:29 42:6 43:1 43:11–13 43:14 43:15 43:16–21 44:2 44:21 44:24 48:17 48:21 49:6 49:7 51:9–11 51:10 53:6

32, 34, 37 32 35, 38 34, 38 115 35, 38 34, 38 34, 38 34, 37 34, 38 32, 34, 37 34, 38 34, 38 34, 38 34, 38 34, 38, 61 35, 38 34, 38 32 34, 38 94

Daniel 9:4

32

Hosea 2:16–17

32

Amos 9:7

32, 35, 38

Micah 7:14–15

32

Nahum 1:2

115

Habakkuk 2:18–20

115

Zephaniah 1:18

115

191

Index of Ancient Sources

Ancient Authors Aristoteles, De Coloribus 793a Clement of Rome 1 Clement 43:6 52:1 52:1–4 52:3 53:2 53:3

145

79 79 79 79 69 69, 79

Clement of Alexandria Stromata 1.23-26 33, 35 1.29 35 Chrysostom, Homiliae in epistulam i ad Corinthios 15:2 126, 129 Dio Chrysostom Discourses 36.46

22

Diodorus Siculus 40.3.4

59

Epictetus, Diatribai 3.22.49

128

Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel 9.18, 23, 27 33, 35, 39 9.27.4 57, 58 9.27.6 58 9.27.36 54 Ecclesiastical History 5.24.2–7 147 5.24.16 147 5.24.16 147

Herodotus Histories 2.122 2.60

144 144

Homer Iliad 9.524–737

29

Josephus Against Apion 1.304–311 2.92–96 2.148

59 59 59

Antiquitates judaicae 2.311 2.312 2.313 2.338–44 2.311-313 3.248-251 3.274 3.248 3.248–249 3.249 3.250 3.291 3.294 3.295–299 3.295–300 3.296–300 3.299 3.302 3.309 3.309–315 3.311–312 3.312 3.321 3.322 4.8 4.11–60 4.13 4.14–56 4.14–60 4.40–50

33, 37 140 139, 143 54 139 139 126 33, 37, 143 139 141 143 33, 37 143 68, 69, 70 71 78 70, 71 71, 78 71 78 71 71 71 78 71 78 71 71 77 68

192

Index of Ancient Sources

4.50 4.56–60 4.61 4.137–138 4.139 4.140 5.20 5.22 5.48 9.260–276 9.264 9.268 9.271 10.68 10.70 10.70–71 11.66 11.109 11.110 14.19 14.21 14.25 17.213 18.29 18.90 19.321 20.105

77 77 77 73 74 74 33, 37 33, 37 37 141 143 33, 37 139 33, 37 141, 143 148, 149 143 33, 37, 139 143 33, 37 139 33, 37 33, 37, 143 33, 37, 139 33, 37 144 33, 37

Sukkah 3.11

62

Philo De ebrietate 110

82

Bellum judaicum 2.8 2.10 2.39 6.420

33, 139 139 33 33, 37, 146

De specialibus legibus II 79 144 145–157 33, 37 145–149 37, 148

Lucian Somnium 8 7 11 13

29 29 29–30 29

Mishnah Pesahim 1.1

133

Sanhedrin 7.4

126

De migratione Abrahami 25 33, 37 Liber Antiquitatum Biblicarum 10.7 62, 77 11.15 62 12.1–10 71 16.2–3 77 20.8 62 Legum allegoriae II, III 2.86 62 3.154 37 3.165 37 3.94 33, 37 Quaestiones et solutions in Exodum I 4 33, 37 De sacrificiis Abelis et Caini 63 33, 37

Quis rerum divinarum heres sit 192 37 255 37 De congress eruditionis gratia 106 37 De Vita Mosis 1.80 1.83 1.84 1.148-154 1.176–80 2.24 2.66–108 2.224-233

58 58 58 58 54 144 58 134

193

Index of Ancient Sources 2.246-258 Plato Phaedrus 245a

58

28

Plutarch De tranquillitate animi 472 a 128 Posidonius Fragmenta 400b

Sextus Empiricus 9.71–74

145

Strabo Geographica 8.6.21b

22

Tacitus Historiae 5.3.1–4.2

59

145

Apocrypha and New Testament 1 Esdras 1:1 7:11–15

148 140

Wisdom of Solomon 11 55 11:4–8 62 18:25 76 Matthew 7:22 9:33 9:34 10:8 10:10 16:6 17:5 26:1–5 26:2

109 109 109 109 46 133 60 149 149

Mark 1:34 1:39 3:15 3:22 6:13 7:26 8:15 9:7 9:38 14:1–2 14:10–16 14:12

109 109 109 109 109 109 133 60 109 149 149 149

Luke 2:41 9:34–36 9:49 10:7 11:14 11:15 11:18 11:19 12:1 22:1 22:7

148, 149 60 109 46 109 109 109 109 133 139, 149 149

John 1:19 1:29 1:36 2:13 2:23 6:4 11:55 12:1 13:1 18:28 18:39 19:14 19:14–16

141 141, 142, 146 146 149 149 149 141, 149 149 149 141 141 141 141

Acts 12:4 15:19 18:6 18:8 18:17

149 155 155 54, 149 149

194 Romans 1:1–2 1:3 1:5 1:9 1:16 1:18–32 1:32 1:25 1:29–30 2:28 3:1–8 3:3–4 3:7 3:20 3:22 3:30 4:1 4:24 4:25 5:12–21 6:1–12 6:3 6:3–4 6:11 7:5 7:5–6 7:7–11 7:18 7:25 8:1–17 8:3 8:3–8 8:4 8:5 8:6 8:7 8:8 8:9 8:9–14 8:10 8:11 8:12 8:13 8:16 8:23–25 8:29 8:31–39 8:32

Index of Ancient Sources

2 131 155 132 165 119 152 145 144 131 68 68 145 131 156 114 100, 131 94 94 131 49, 50 56, 57, 60 122 50 130 131 70 131 131 131 130 131 130 130 130 130 130 130 131 131, 132 94 130 130, 131 132 131 158 94 94

8:38–39 9:1 9:1–18 9:3 9:4 9:5 9:7 9:8 9:24 10:12 10:18 10:19 11 11:3 11:11 11:14 11:22 12:1–2 12:9 13:14 15 15:4 15:7–13 15:8 15:8–9 15:9 15:16 16:23 1 Corinthians 1:1 1:2

1:3 1:4 1:4–5 1:7 1:7–8 1:8 1:9 1:10 1:10–12 1:10–17 1:12 1:13 1:13–15

109 145 165 131 100 131 4 130 155 156 4 114, 116 116 99, 100 116 116, 131 117 96 144 130 118 3, 6, 160 155 145 155 155 155 54

27, 40, 44, 84 2, 11, 12, 27, 41, 42, 44, 46, 49, 84, 90, 96, 123, 136, 138, 155, 156, 162 27, 84, 123 27, 84 85 2, 85 68, 85, 93 85 2, 3, 27, 46, 49, 78, 79, 84, 165 2, 10 53 19, 49, 53, 65, 128 53 49, 53, 56, 60 49

Index of Ancient Sources 1:13–17 1:14 1:14–15 1:15 1:16 1:18 1:18–21 1:18–2:5 1:18–2:16 1:18–3:23 1:19 1:20 1:21 1:22 1:23 1:24 1:26 1:26–27 1:26–31 1:27–29 1:28 1:29 1:30

1:30–31 1:31 2:1–5 2:5 2:6 2:6–7 2:6–16 2:9 2:10 2:11 2:11–13 2:12 2:16 2:23 3:1–2 3:1–23 3:1–4:21 3:3 3:5 3:9 3:9–15 3:10–17 3:13

53 44, 54, 149 56, 57 60 54 1, 42, 132, 155 86 2, 11, 26, 30, 31, 50, 85, 86, 94, 97, 122 28, 113, 128, 166 2 13 86, 166 86, 132 148, 155 148, 155 148, 155 130 27 94 86 86 127, 128, 130 2, 17, 27, 30, 46, 79, 123, 138, 139, 151, 155, 158, 167 86 13, 42, 50, 127 1, 86, 95 95 27, 109 27, 86 85 13 86 132 86 11 13, 96 94 11 95, 97, 121 15, 53 11 86 40, 42, 44, 86, 123 86 136 85

3:13–15 3:15 3:16 3:16–17

3:17 3:19b–20 3:21 3:23

4:1 4:4–5 4:5 4:6 4:7 4:8 4:10 4:15 4:15–16 4:18 4:19 4:20 4:21 5:1

5:1–2 5:1–5 5:1–13

5:1–6:20 5:2 5:3 5:4 5:5

5:6

5:6–7 5:6–8

195 68, 85, 93, 152 132 40, 44 27, 42, 86, 96, 112, 115, 123, 138, 154, 156, 157 40, 44 13 127, 128 2, 27, 30, 40, 42, 44, 46, 50, 60, 65, 86, 112, 156, 165, 167 86 85 68, 86 127 127, 128, 136 128 117 11 42 127, 128, 136 127, 128, 136 87 132 125, 126, 127, 135, 145, 151, 152, 154, 155, 158 127 126–133, 133 2, 4, 5, 11, 16, 64, 74, 125, 135, 154, 156, 161, 162, 165 167 125, 127, 128, 136, 137, 153, 154 132 132, 157 68, 77, 125, 129, 131, 132, 159, 161, 162 8,127, 128, 133, 136, 137, 138, 157, 161 97, 133–140, 161 2, 5, 8, 12, 13, 16, 18, 19, 20, 31, 41, 42, 44, 45, 74, 98, 111, 125–159, 132,

196

5:6–13 5:7

5:7–8 5:8

5:9 5:9–11 5:9–13 5:10 5:11 5:12 5:13 6:1–11 6:2 6:9 6:9–10 6:9–11 6:11

6:12 6:12–13 6:12–20

6:13 6:15 6:16 6:17 6:18 6:19 6:19–20

Index of Ancient Sources 133, 142, 150, 154, 156, 158, 160, 161, 162, 164, 165 158 11, 18, 90, 97, 115, 125, 127, 136, 137, 138–143, 140, 142, 145, 146, 150, 151, 156, 157, 158, 161, 162, 164, 165 157 8, 11, 125, 143– 151, 144, 146, 150, 151, 156, 158, 161, 165 15, 19, 125, 135, 150 138, 158 12, 133, 151–154 135, 151, 152 135, 151, 152 152, 154, 161, 162 13, 152, 157, 161 5, 129, 152 40, 44, 68 68, 125, 135, 152 13, 68, 152, 156 40, 44, 68, 87 3, 13, 16, 20, 30, 80, 97, 115, 125, 130, 138, 140, 157, 161, 162 162, 163 135 2, 42, 64, 74, 85, 87, 112, 121, 134, 135, 156 135 40, 44, 97, 135, 136, 161, 162 13, 130 96, 112 135, 161 27, 74, 96, 115, 154, 156, 157 112, 123, 130, 136, 151, 154, 156, 157, 161

6:20 7:1 7:1–40 7:2–5 7:16 7:17–24 7:28 7:29–31 7:31 8:1 8:1–3 8:1–6 8:1–7 8:1–13

8:1–10:22 8:1–11:1

8:2 8:3 8:4 8:4–6 8:5 8:5–6 8:6

8:7 8:7–13 8:7–9:27 8:8 8:8–9 8:8–10 8:9 8:10 8:10–12 8:10–13 8:11

17, 27, 74, 136, 140, 155, 157, 161, 163 15, 19, 25, 101, 128 5 64 132 87 130 85 27, 93 46, 53, 79, 101 46 79 115, 128 5, 16, 17, 25, 26, 44, 64, 72, 74, 85, 89, 98, 101–109, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 111, 113, 118, 121, 124, 128 103, 106 2, 25, 26, 43, 44, 46, 79, 87, 101, 103, 104, 108, 113, 117, 152, 160, 163 80 27, 80, 108, 112, 113 79, 87, 102, 106, 112, 114, 115 46, 105, 121 101, 105 19 17, 24, 48, 53, 73, 75, 79, 80, 101, 110, 114, 115, 123, 166 90, 102, 112 158 46 79, 106 102 103 101, 105, 106 25, 26, 42, 101, 102, 103, 104 26, 80, 96, 123 16, 44, 45, 68, 75, 134, 163, 167 95, 96, 102, 114

Index of Ancient Sources 8:11–12 8:12 8:13 9:1 9:1–2 9:1–27 9:3–4 9:8–10 9:9 9:9–10 9:13 9:14 9:19 9:19–23 9:20 9:21 9:22 9:24–27 9:27 10:1 10:1–2 10:1–4

10:1–5 10:1–10 10:1–13

10:1–22

10:2 10:2–4 10:3

103, 107, 123, 124 65, 96, 102, 158 78, 90, 102, 105 46 46, 53 44, 46, 101, 113, 163 99 46 46 13 99 46 101 96 148, 149, 155 46 132 152 101, 108 3, 51, 53, 63, 65, 66, 67, 78, 87, 99, 146 54, 61, 123 63, 64, 68, 69, 90, 91, 98, 99, 100, 157, 158, 162 43, 47–64, 51, 53, 55, 63, 87 14 17, 43, 44, 47–88, 51, 71, 75, 87, 89, 99, 100, 108, 119, 121, 122, 164, 165, 2, 4, 5, 8, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 31, 41, 42, 42–124, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 52, 53, 63, 78, 79, 87, 101, 102, 103, 104, 108, 109, 113, 114, 117, 120, 122, 123, 124, 125, 151, 156, 158, 160, 162, 163, 164 42, 53, 55, 56, 59, 60, 63, 67, 87, 91 52, 87 53

10:3–4 10:4

10:5

10:5–10 10:5–11 10:6

10:6–10 10:6–11

10:7

10:7–10 10:8 10:8–10 10:9 10:10 10:11

10:11–13 10:12 10:12–13 10:13

10:14

10:14–17 10:14–22

197 54, 63, 67, 91, 123, 162 42, 43, 53, 61, 62, 67, 90, 113, 117, 119, 165 63, 64, 69, 77, 79, 89, 98, 114, 115, 119 77, 119, 123, 162 53 8, 31, 63, 64, 65, 66, 69–71, 78, 99, 119, 163, 165 17, 47, 71, 88 43, 64–77, 65, 68, 70, 78, 79, 80, 108, 114, 119, 157, 162, 164 4, 8, 13, 15, 67, 69, 71–73, 87, 98, 99, 100, 115, 138, 164 71 8, 72–75, 165 69, 116 8, 42, 48, 52, 75–76, 113 8, 64, 65, 76–77, 157 2, 3, 6, 8, 20, 31, 39, 63, 65, 66, 68, 69, 78, 85, 91, 93, 99, 119, 150, 160, 162, 163, 165 78 78, 118 43, 78 2, 3, 78, 79, 80, 84, 85, 87, 88, 101, 117, 119, 123, 157, 160, 163, 165 17, 25, 26, 64, 67, 85, 89, 90, 102, 115, 123, 162, 163 42, 91 16, 17, 47, 80, 85, 88, 89–124, 90, 98, 101, 103, 104, 111, 114, 121, 123, 158, 167

198 10:15 10:15–17 10:16 10:16–17

10:17 10:18 10:18–19 10:18–20 10:18–21 10:18–22 10:18–23 10:19 10:19–20 10:20 10:20–21 10:20–22 10:21–22 10:22

10:23 10:23–11:1 10:24 10:25 10:25–26 10:26 10:27–29 10:31 10:31 10:31–32 10:31–11:1 10:32

10:33 10:33–11:1 11:1

Index of Ancient Sources 90 89 50, 85, 90–98, 97, 122 17, 50, 54, 74, 89, 90–98, 91, 92, 96, 97, 114, 121, 122, 162, 163 10, 40, 44, 53, 91, 96, 97, 156 63, 89, 98–100, 99, 110, 121, 130 157 17, 98–114, 105, 113, 114, 116, 121 102 117 85 109, 114 89, 93, 98, 100–113, 110, 121 101, 111, 112, 115, 117 40, 44, 89, 103, 109, 157, 162 104 18, 114–121 17, 64, 68, 73, 76, 78, 80, 86, 115, 117, 118, 120, 121, 158, 160, 162, 165 10, 135, 163 5, 85, 102, 103, 106, 109, 113 113, 124, 163 111 101 13 101 113, 155 11, 17, 124 47, 163 113 2, 11, 27, 40, 44, 96, 123, 136, 148, 155, 156, 163 132 113, 163 42, 96, 113, 163

11:1–16 11:2 11:7–12 11:16 11:17–34 11:20 11:21 11:22 11:23 11:23–25 11:23–26 11:24–25 11:25 11:26 11:27 11:29 11:29–30 11:30 11:32 12:1 12:1–14:40 12:2

12:3 12:4–6 12:4–27 12:4–31 12:7 12:12 12:12–13 12:12–27 12:12–31 12:13 12:18 12:24 12:27 12:28 13:1–13 13:8–9 13:8–13 13:9 13:12 14:1–33

12 50 13 40, 44 42, 51, 53, 54, 87, 90, 91, 92, 97, 98 92, 95, 98, 121 92 2, 11, 40, 44, 51, 87, 92, 136, 156 50, 92, 94 89, 151 2, 50, 90, 121, 122, 156 95 50, 93 2, 51, 85, 87, 92, 93, 96, 121 92 44, 92 130 87, 98, 130 68 145 85, 87 3, 11, 13, 15, 17, 27, 40, 44, 80, 102, 123, 149, 155, 156, 165 42 97 158 27 49 49 27, 49, 54, 96, 97, 156, 165 10, 136 156 53, 60, 148, 155 49 49 42, 49, 96, 97, 156 15, 49 85 112 128 80 80 27

199

Index of Ancient Sources 14:20 14:21 14:22–25 14:25 15:1–11 15:1–58 15:2 15:3–4 15:3–11 15:9 15:10 15:12–57 15:24 15:25 15:26 15:26–28 15:27 15:32 15:33 15:39 15:42–56 15:44 15:45 15:50 15:51–58 15:54–55 15:54–56 15:1–28 16:5–9 16:5–12 16:15–18 16:17–18 16:19–20 16:22

144 13 11 5, 13, 123 2, 42, 94, 95 85, 87 27, 132 2, 5 94 11, 40, 44, 136, 156 85 131 68 13 109 94 4, 13 13 13 130 68 130 13 130 119 13 109 27 19 19 15, 54 19 12 2, 85, 91

2 Corinthians 1:12 2:1–4 2:17 3:1–3 3:4–18 3:7–18 3:8 3:12–18 4:7–15 5:1–11 5:5 5:10 6:16–18

145 19 145 53 13 59 145 60 94 53 131 152 96

7:5 7:6–13 8:16–24 10:1–13:10 10:2 10:3 11:5 11:10 12:2 13:8

131 19 19 53 130 130 129 145 153, 154 145

Galatians 1:1–5 1:4 1:9 1:12 1:16 2:5 2:14 2:16 3:3 3:12 3:16 3:20 3:26 3:27 3:27–28 3:27–29 3:28 3:29 4:13 4:14 4:19 4:29 5:2–12 5:7 5:9 5:13 5:16 5:17 5:19 5:24 6:8 6:12 6:16

94 144 129 2 2, 131 145 145 131 130 4 50 114 50 50, 56, 57 49 50, 51 155, 156, 165 50 131 131 158 130 129 145 125, 133, 145, 161 130, 131 130 130 130, 131 130, 131 130 129, 130 52, 158

Ephesians 4:6 4:31

114 144

200

Index of Ancient Sources

5:16 6:12–13 6:16

144 144 144

Philippians 3:5 4:2 4:8–9 4:9

3 129 145 145

Colossians 1:21 2:12 3:8 3:11

144 94 144 155

1 Thessalonians 1:9 1:10 4:5 5:22

114, 145 94 155 144

2 Thessalonians 3:2 3:3

144 144

1 Timothy 6:4

144

2 Timothy 3:13 4:18

144 144

Titus 3:3

144

1 Peter 1:14–17 1:18–19 1:19

142 141, 142 146

Revelation 5:6 5:9 5:12 12:11

146 146 146 146

Index of Modern Authors Aageson, James W. 9 Adams, Edward 1, 138 Allan, George 7, 32, 49 Amandry, Michel 22 Anderson, Gary 55, 56 Argall, R. A. 33 Assmann, Jan 33 Badke, William B. 57 Balch, David L. 135 Barclay, John M. G. 10, 58, 158 Barnard, L. W. 72 Barrett, C. K. 43, 54, 56, 99, 105, 116, 117, 120, 127, 130, 131 Beard, Mary 24 Bell, Catharine 95, 96, 137, 138 Bell, R. H. 4, 110 Bieringer, R. 9 Birch, Bruce 39 Bokser, Baruch 37, 147, 148 Bookidis, Nancy 21 Botha, Pieter J. J. 14 Bow, B. A. 33 Brettler, Marc Zwi 33 Brodie, Thomas L. 9 Broneer, O. 107 Brown, Alexandra 42 Bruce, F. F. 130 Brueggemann, Walter 39 Brunt, John 104, 112 Bultmann, R. 130 Byrne, Brendan 66 Cambier, J. 131 Cameron, Averil 21 Campbell, Barth 132 Campbell, J. Y. 110 Chow, J. 105, 127, 128, 129 Ciampa, Roy E. 116

Clarke, A. D. 9, 104, 105, 126, 127, 129, 136 Cohick, Lynn H. 147 Colautti, Frederico M. 141, 143 Collier, G. D. 44 Collins, Adela Yarbro 127, 128, 131, 132 Collins, John J. 1, 33, 34, 58, 166 Collins, Raymond F. 9, 47, 52, 99, 132 Conzelmann, H. 105, 117, 127, 130 Corbett, P. E. 126 Countryman, L. William 134 Coutsoumpos, P. 109, 117 Culpepper, R. Alan 11, 12, 13 Daube, D. 1 Davies, W. D. 6 De Boer, Martinus C. 27 DeMaris, Richard E. 21, 23 De Vos, Craig Steven 127, 135 Del Chiaro, Mario A. 21 Deming, W. 129 Derret, J. D. M. 129 DiMattei, Steven 8, 66 Donaldson, Terence 34 Durham, John 72, 81 Eastman, Brad 7 Edwards, Katherine 22 Eichrodt, Walther 83 Ellis, E. Earle 9, 44, 50, 62 Engels, Donald 23, 25 Enns, Peter 62 Evans, Craig A. 4, 5 Fape, M. O. 49 Fee, G. 44, 49, 99, 101, 104, 131 Feldman, Louis H. 55, 73 Ferguson, Everett 135 Fiore, Benjamin 134 Fishbane, M. 1, 33, 36, 38, 39, 49

202

Index of Modern Authors

Fisk, Bruce N. 71, 78, 103, 104, 107, 108 Fitzmyer, Joseph A. 44, 99 Foerster, G. 24 Fotopoulos, John 25, 26, 100, 101, 103, 106, 107, 109, 120, 136 Fretheim, Terence E. 39, 71, 82 Furnish, Victor Paul 86 Gager, John G. 58 Gamble, Harry Y. 14 Garland, David E. 47, 52, 110 Gardner, Jane F. 136 Gardner, P. 91, 100 Gathercole, S. J. 158 Gaventa, Beverly Roberts 11, 51, 92, 94 Geertz, Clifford 7, 36, 93 Godet, F. 130 Goppelt, Leonhard 66 Goulder, Michael D. 135, 136 Gressman, Hugo 99 Gruen, Erich S. 58 Hafemann, Scott J. 10 Hagner, Donald A. 72 Hahn, F. 48 Halbwachs, Maurice 33 Hanson, A. T. 116 Hartog, P. 136 Havener, Ivan 130, 132 Hay, Daniel M. 59 Hays, Richard B. 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 14, 52, 64, 65, 66, 68, 71, 72, 75, 76, 94, 95, 100, 105, 111, 128, 131, 132, 139, 153, 154, 162 Hickling, C. J. A. 9 Heil, John Paul 9-10, 13, 87 Hendel, Ronald S. 33, 57 Héring, J. 43, 102 Hooker, Morna D. 5 Horrell, David G. 48, 101, 104, 112, 113 Horsley, Richard A. 47, 99, 105 Howard, J. K. 9, 134 Hughes, Robert Bruce 9 Hurd, J. C. 43, 102, 130 Jacobs, Lambert D. 134, 135 Jaegar, Werner 55 Jeremias, J. 92, 147, 148, 149 Jonker, Gerdien 33

Joy, N. G. 131 Käsemann, E. 91 Keener, Craig 52 Keesmaat, Sylvia 4, 6–7, 8, 32, 150 Kelber, Werner H. 32 Kent, John Harvey 23 Kirk, Alan 2, 31, 62 Kistemaker, Simon 130 Klauck, Hans-Josef 23, 44 Koch, Dietrich-Alex 9 Koet, Bart J. 9 Kreitzer, L. 62 Lambrecht, Jan 9 Lampe, Peter 109, 130 Lanier, David E. 9 Levine, Lee I. 24 Levinskaya, Irina 24 Lierman, John 56, 57, 59 Lietzmann, H. 127 Lieu, Judith 1, 11, 94, 167 Lindemann, Andreas 9 Lona, Horacio E. 72 Longenecker, Bruce W. 1, 7, MacDonald, M. Y. 48, 95 Macleod, M.D. 30 Malan, S. François 9 Marrou, H. I. 28, 55 Martin, Dale 104, 110, 111, 137 Martyn, J. Louis 50, 157-158 McEwen, A. 62 Mchami, Ronilick E. K. 5 McMullen, Ramsay 107 Meeks, Wayne 40, 42, 48, 49, 64, 76, 91, 94, 112, 116, 122, 133, 148, 155, 156 Menken, M. J. J. 116 Merklein, H. 43 Metzger, Bruce 75 Meyers, Carol 57 Miller, Colin 23, 24 Miller, Patrick 34, 38 Minear, P. S. 134 Mitchell, A. C. 128 Mitchell, Margaret 2, 10–11, 15, 19, 44, 45, 46, 65, 70, 71, 76, 113, 134, 151, 162

Index of Modern Authors Mitton, C. L. 134 Morris, L. 131 Moule, C. F. D. 93 Moyise, S. 116 Murphy, Frederick J. 77 Newton, Derek 46, 104, 106, 107, 108, 111, 114 North, John 24 Obenhaus, Stacy 136 Ong, Walter 13 Oropeza, B. J. 9, 91, 105, 110, 119 Ostmeyer, K. H. 66 Parry, R. St. John 117 Pascuzzi, Maria 132, 136 Pate, C. Marvin 9 Penna, Romano 9 Petersen, David L. 39 Phua, Liong-Seng Richard 108 Pickett, Raymond 42, 95, 96 Plummer, A. 131 Porter, Stanley 7 Price, S. R. F. 23, 24 Prosic, Tamara 139 Pucci, Jospeh 8 Ricoeur, Paul 31-32 Robertson, A. 131 Robinson, Betsey A. 22 Roehrs, W. R. 66, 67 Rosner, Brian 6, 9, 115, 116, 118, 119, 136, 137, 153 Rowe, C. Kavin 26 Sacchi, Paolo 139 Sandelin, K. G. 44 Sanders, E. P. 139 Sanders, J. A. 4, 5 Schenk, W. 43, 102 Schmithals, W. 43, 102 Schubert, Paul 85 Schunack, G. 66 Shillington, V. G. 129, 131, 154 Shils, Edward 7, 32 Signer, M. 33 Silva, M. 5 Skarsaune, Oskar 72

203

Smit, Joop F. M. 10, 44, 45, 46, 100, 133 Smith, Jonathan Z. 49 Smith, Mark S. 33 Söding, T. 91 Soulen, R. Kendall 165-166 South, James T. 131, 151 Stanley, Christopher 4, 7, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 149 Stewart-Sykes, Alistair 147 Still, E. Coye 108 Talbert, Charles H. 92, 131 Thatcher, T. 2 Theissen, Gerd 92, 106, 107, 128 Thiselton, A. 44, 47, 49, 53, 93, 117, 126, 127, 131, 134 Thrall, M. E. 130 Tomson, Peter J. 9 Tuckett, Christopher 12 Turcan, Robert 23 Vanbeck, A. 130 Wagenaar, Jan A. 139 Wagner, J. Ross 4, 15, 116, 117 Walbank, Mary E. Hoskins 21 Walerk Susan 21 Walker, W. O. 44 Wansbrough, H. 62 Waters, Guy 116 Watson, D. F. 113 Watson, Francis 4, 5, 15, 62, 70, 71 Wedderburn, A. J. M. 50 Weima, J. A. D. 5 Weiss, J. 43, 102 Werline, R. A. 33 Whitmarsh, Tim 28, 29, 30, 55 Wilk, F. 4 Williams, Charles K. 21, 25 Williams, H. H. Drake 9 Willis, Wendell Lee 26, 44, 47, 99, 100, 102, 105, 109, 110, 113 Windisch, Hans 157 Winter, Bruce 9, 53, 74, 101, 107, 126, 151, 152 Witherington, Ben 103 Yeo, Kyiok-Kyung 43 Zaas, Peter S. 9, 135, 152

Subject Index Acrocorinth 22, 25 Adultery 74–75, 126–129, 153 Allusion 7–10, 88, 154, 160–166 Ancestors 52–54 Aphrodite 21, 23, 25 Apion 33, 35, 36, 59 Artapanus 35, 57–58 Asclepion 23, 25–26, 106–109 Asclepios 23, 106–109 Audience 12–17, 25 Author 12, 13 Banquet halls 25, 106–109 Baptism 47–61 Bellerophon 22–23 Boasting 27, 50, 64, 85, 86, 96, 127–129, 158, 136 Chaeremon 33, 35, 36 Church 108, 111, 112, 114, 154–156, 166–167 Cloud 60–61 Corinth, city of 20–27 Corporate Responsibility 151–154 Craving evil 69–71 Demeter 23 Demons 101–113 Dining rooms 106–109 Divine faithfulness 68–69, 81–87, 114– 120, 123 Eschaton 85–86 Eucharist 48–52, 61–62, 90–98 Excommunication 126–131, 154–156 Exodus traditions 31–40, 138–143, 143– 151, 160–165 Flesh 129–131

Foolish 1–2, 11, 26, 31, 86 Gentiles 52, 133, 146–151, 154–56 Golden Calf 15, 69, 71–73, 82, 99, 100, 115, 138 Greek identity 29–30 Grumbling 76–77 Identity 29–30, 154–156 Idol food 101–108 Idolatry 71–75 Imperial cult 23–24, 107–108 Incest 126–129 Isthmian Games 107 Jealousy of God 114–120 Jews in Corinth 3, 36, 146–150 Josephus 37–38, 70, 73–74, 77, 126, 139, 141, 143, 146 Knowledgeable 44, 74, 78, 89, 90, 95, 96, 101–114, 115, 118, 123, 124, 128, 158 κοινωνία 48–50, 86, 90–98, 114–120, 124 Liberty 102, 105, 127–129 Lucian 29–30 Lysimachus 33, 35, 36, 59 Manetho 33, 35, 36, 58–59 Moses 55–59 Osarsiph 58–59 Paideia 27–40 Paschal traditions 36–38, 133–151 Passover 36–38, 146–150 Pegasus 22, 24 Peirene Fountain 22

Index of Subjects

205

πενθέω 153–154 Philo 35, 37, 52, 54, 58, 62, 71, 77, 82, 144, 148 Porneia 73–75, 126–129 Purity 144–146

Spirit 87, 94–97, 115, 121, 131–132, 145, 158–159, 161, 162, 165, 167 Spiritual drink 61–63 Spiritual food 61–63 Strong 44, 78, 90, 111, 114–122

Ritual 48–52, 90–98 Readers of scripture 12–17, 164–164 Rock 61–63 Roman Corinth 20–27

Table fellowship 100–113 Temple E 21 Temple F 21 Testing Christ 75–76 Thanksgiving of the letter 85 τύπος 65–68

σάρξ 129–131 Sea 60–61 Sincerity 144–146 Social stratification 128–129

Weak 76, 80, 87, 90, 96, 97–98, 101– 109, 110, 111, 117, 124, 158, 162