Basics on Paul and his Letters

Excerpts from Raymond E. Brown:
Introduction to the New Testament

General Issues In Paul

Introducing 1 Thessalonians

Introducing Galatians

Introducing Philippians

Introducing 1 Corinthians

General Issues In Paul's Life And Thought

A) The Life of Paul

B) The Theology of Paul

Next to Jesus Paul has been the most influential figure in the history of Christianity. Although all the NT writers are working out the implications of Jesus for particular communities of believers, Paul in his numerous letters does this on the widest scale of all. That range, plus the depth of his thought and the passion of his involvement, have meant that since his letters became part of the NT, no Christian has been unaffected by what he has written. Whether or not they know Paul's works well, through what they have been taught about doctrine and piety, all Christians have become Paul's children in the faith. A general Chapter devoted to what we know about Paul's life and some main points in his thought, therefore, is an essential part of a NT Introduction.

A) The Life of Paul

There are two sources for his life: biographical details in his own letters and accounts of his career in Acts (beginning with 7:58). There are three views of how to relate these sources, (a) Virtually complete trust in Acts. The traditional lives of Paul are guided strongly by Acts, fitting and adapting information from the letters into the Acts framework, (b) Great distrust of Acts. By way of reaction and as part of a skepticism about the historical value of Acts, what that book reports about Paul has been questioned. Indeed, some scholars have constructed Paul's career entirely or largely leaving out the Acts information, or drastically correcting it by heightening the differences between Acts and the letters into contradictions (e.g., Becker, Knox, Jewett, Lüdemann). (c) A mediate stance uses Paul's letters as a primary source and cautiously supplements from Acts,1 not hastening to declare apparent differences contradictory. The possibilities of this third stance {423} will be presented here, and readers should review the discussion of Acts in Chapter 10 above, especially as to whether a companion of Paul could have been the author (pp. 322-27).

There is no doubt that Acts has offered a theological interpretation of Paul, adapting his role to fit an overall view of the spread of Christianity "to the end of the earth" (Ac 1:8). Moreover, the author may have had only a sketchy view of parts of Paul's career, so that he telescoped and compacted complex events. Nevertheless, there is simply too much correspondence between Acts and autobiographical remarks in Paul's epistles for one to dismiss the Acts information: The author knew a great number of facts about Paul. To appreciate that, see Table 5 on the next page.2 Let us review what can be reconstructed of Paul's life from a critical use of the two sources.

Birth and Upbringing

Paul was probably born ca. ad 5-10, during the reign of the Emperor Augustus. He is described in Ac 7:58 as a young man at the stoning of Stephen, and in Phlm 9 (written after ad 55) as an "old man."3 Jews at this period, especially in the diaspora (i.e., outside Palestine), often had two names, one Greek or Roman, the other Semitic. "Paul" (Paulus) was a well-known Roman family name. Since the apostle describes himself as of the tribe of Benjamin (Rm 11:1; Ph 3:5), there is no reason to doubt Acts that his Jewish name was "Saul"4"4 (called after the first king of Israel, a Benja-minite).

Paul never tells us where he was born; but the information in Acts that he was a citizen of Tarsus, the prosperous capital of Cilicia (Ac 22:3; Ac 21:39: "no mean city"), is perfectly plausible, Tarsus had a considerable Jewish colony; and by his own testimony, in his early years as a Christian Paul hastened to go to Cilicia (Ga 1:21). Ac 16:37-38 and 22:25-29 identify Paul as a Roman citizen by birth.5 Some have suggested that Tarsus' inhabitants received that privilege, but citizenship may have come to Paul through his family rather than through the status of Jews in Tarsus.

First Missionary Journey; the Jerusalem Meeting; the Antioch Aftermath

One of the main objections to using Acts as a guide to Paul's life is that in his letters Paul shows no awareness of numbered (three) missionary journeys. It is argued pungently that if you had asked Paul of the letters, "Which missionary journey are you on now?", he would not have known what you were talking about. But to a certain extent one might say the same about the Paul of Acts, which never explicitly spells out three missionary journeys.17 Indeed, Acts indicates that during a year and a half Paul was at Corinth and during three years he was at Ephesus, and thus not journeying in the ordinary sense of the word. The three journeys are only a convenient classification developed by students of Acts, and I shall use them in that sense. According to Ac 13:3-14:28 a missionary journey from Antioch in Syria took Barnabas, Paul, and John Mark by sea to Cyprus, then on to the Asia Minor cities of Perga (and, after John Mark departed), Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe, before Paul and Barnabas returned to Antioch in Syria (ca. ad 49). Having met opposition in synagogues, Paul addressed himself to Gentiles among whom the gospel was well received.18 In his undisputed letters Paul gives us no information about such a journey. Yet in Ga 2:1-3 he recalls preaching to the Gentiles before the Jerusalem meeting of ad 49 (to be discussed in the next paragraph), and in 2 Co 11:25 he mentions being stoned (as he was at Lystra in Ac 14:19 - see also n. 16 above and the place-names in 2 Tm 3:11).

According to Ac 10:44-48; Ac 11:20-21, there were others before Paul who made converts among the Gentiles (seemingly without any insistence on circumcision), but perhaps in situations where such Gentiles could be absorbed into communities of Jewish Christians. Apparently Paul's innovation was to have formed entire communities of Gentile Christians with little or no attachment to Judaism. What did this portend for the future of Christianity? After Paul (and Barnabas) returned to Antioch, a meeting was held in Jerusalem ca. 49 to answer that question (Ac 15:1-29 and Ga 2:1-10). Although there are differences between the two accounts, they agree that Paul, James (brother of the Lord), and Peter (Cephas) were involved, and that there was a group opposed to Paul who insisted that the Gentiles should {432} be circumcised. By the medium of speeches, Acts highlights the reasons offered by Peter and James for agreeing with Paul that circumcision could not be demanded.19 Ga 2:9 reports that these others recognized the grace and apostolate bestowed on Paul and extended to him the right hand of fellowship.

The decision to accept the Gentiles without circumcision did not settle all problems. Were the Gentiles bound by other parts of the Law of Moses, especially the purity laws concerning food? What was the relationship of Jewish Christians who observed these laws to Gentile Christians who did not? Both Ac 15:30 and Ga 2:11,13 agree that after the Jerusalem meeting Paul and Barnabas went back to Antioch. There according to Ga 2:12-14 a major dispute occurred: Peter who had been eating with the Gentiles backed down when men came from James with an objection. To Paul this attempt to compel the Gentiles to live like Jews violated the truth of the gospel! Acts tells us nothing about such a dispute but in a confused way does have a letter sent (as James wished: 15:20) from Jerusalem to Antioch, ordering that in Syria and Cilicia Gentiles keep the Jewish purity laws, especially concerning food.20 Ga 2:13 reports that at Antioch Barnabas too sided with the men from James, and Ac 15:36-40 indicates that Paul and Barnabas came to an unhappy parting of the ways so that Paul left Antioch with Silas immediately afterward. Apparently, then, Paul lost the battle about food laws at Antioch, and that may explain why Antioch no longer features prominently as the home base of Paul's missionary activity.21 In his journeys he is now much more on his own.

Second and Third Missionary Journeys

Although, as explained above, this division of journeys is common among scholars, the missionary activity described in Ac 15:40-21:15 can be taken together as Luke's illustration of Paul's wider-ranging enterprise after the Jerusalem decision opened the Gentile world to belief in Jesus without circumcision (ad 50-58).

In the first part of the activity (ad 50-52; the "Second Journey": {433} 15:40-18:22) Acts reports that Paul returned to sites in SE Asia Minor evangelized in the First Journey. Then going north (for the first time) to Galatia and Phrygia, he crossed over to Macedonia (Europe) from Troas, clearly under divine guidance.22 There his travels brought him to Philippi, Thessalonica, Beroea, Athens, and Corinth. To three of those five cities NT letters bearing Paul's name would eventually be sent. Indeed the first preserved Pauline letter, I Thessalonians, was written from Corinth as Paul expressed concern for a church he had recently evangelized (ad 50-51). Paul's eighteen-month stay at Corinth was the longest thus far at any church he was founding;23 ironically he was to leave behind there a community that would be troubled over more issues than any other to which he would write. Aquila and Priscilla (Prisca), whom he met at Corinth24 and who would sail with him to Ephesus, became lifelong friends and co-workers both at Ephesus and Rome. The fact that at Corinth Paul was haled before Gallio the proconsul of Achaia (Ac 18:12) has been used as a linchpin of Pauline chronology, for an inscription (NJBC 79:9) places Gallio as proconsul at Corinth in the twelfth year of Claudius (41-54), which began on Jan. 25, 52. Gallio seems to have left Corinth by the end of 52.25 These perimeters suggest dating Paul's stay at Corinth to 50/51-52. Ac 18:18b-22 has Paul depart from Cenchreae, the port of Corinth, touch down at Ephesus and Caesarea (on the Palestinian coast), and then go up to greet the church (at Jerusalem).

In the second part of Paul's wide-ranging missionary activity (ad 53/ 54-58; the "Third Journey"; Ac 18:23-21:15), after spending "some time" at Syrian Antioch, he went once more through Galatia and Phrygia to Ephesus,26 the most important city of the Roman province of Asia, where he {434} stayed three years (54 till the spring of 57: Ac 20:31; cf. 19:8,10; 1 Co 16:8). Among the events that Ac 19:1-20:1 recounts are Paul's struggle with the seven sons of a Jewish high priest who were exorcists, and the riot led against Paul by the silversmiths devoted to "Artemis/Diana of the Ephesians,"27 which led to his departure. In his letters Paul never speaks explicitly of these events at Ephesus; yet he may refer to the latter implicitly in the list of hardships in 2 Co 11:23-26, in "the affliction that came to us in Asia" (2 Co 1:8), or in "I fought at Ephesus with beasts" (1 Co 15:32; also 16:8-9: "There are many opponents"). In particular, those allusions to Paul's ordeals allow the possibility that the apostle may have been imprisoned at Ephesus, even though Acts describes no such imprisonment. That issue is important because many suggest that Paul wrote from Ephesus the letters to the Philippians and to Philemon, both of which were written while Paul was a prisoner. More generally agreed is that while at Ephesus he wrote to the Galatians, expressing anguished concern over what had happened there in the four or five years since his evangelizing efforts in N. Galatia ca. 50. Toward the end of Paul's stay at Ephesus, troubles in the church of Corinth were brought to his attention; and some of the Corinthian correspondence was written at that time (1 Corinthians (16:8); and a tearful letter (2 Co 2:3-4: lost?)), interspersed with a painful visit (2 Co 2:1). Acts is completely silent about Paul's difficult dealings with Corinth.

Sometime after Pentecost (late springtime) in 57 Paul left Ephesus for Troas, farther north on the Asiatic shore of the Aegean; but not finding there Titus, whom he had sent to straighten out things in Corinth, he crossed to Europe and Macedonia (Philippi?2 Co 2:12-13) where he met Titus who was bearing the good news that a reconciliation had been effected. Paul then wrote (perhaps in two stages) what is now 2 Corinthians. Finally he went to Achaia and Corinth where he spent three winter months (57/58). There Paul gathered receipts from a collection for the Jerusalem Christians, taken up in various churches he had evangelized; he would bring these funds to Jerusalem on his planned journey. At Corinth Paul also composed Romans, {435} alerting the house-churches in the capital of the Empire that he planned to visit there on his way to Spain, once he had taken the collection to Jerusalem (15:24-26). In that letter there is an effort to ingratiate himself as if the Romans had heard exaggerated reports about him.

According to Ac 20:2-17 (spring 58) Paul set out from Corinth to Jerusalem by way of Macedonia, spending Passover at Philippi. Then sailing to Troas, Paul worked his way down the Asian coast to Miletus where he gave a farewell speech to the presbyters of Ephesus who had come to see him (20:17-38).28 At Miletus and again at Tyre and Caesarea as he reached the Palestinian coast, Paul exhibited a foreboding of imprisonment and death at the end of the journey. There is some confirmation of that in Rm 15:30-31 where Paul asks prayers for his forthcoming visit to Jerusalem that he "may be delivered from the disobedient in Judea."

Paul Arrested in Jerusalem; Imprisoned in Caesarea; Taken to Rome; Death

Most of the last half-dozen years of Paul's life (ca. 58-64) is recounted in Ac 21:15-28:31; they were marked by suffering, four of them by imprisonment. (Those who do not attribute Philippians and Philemon to the putative imprisonment at Ephesus attribute them to the imprisonment at Caesarea or at Rome, thus dating them later. Otherwise this period of Paul's life cannot be confirmed by the Pauline letters.) Only in passing does Acts (24:17) confirm that Paul brought donation money to Jerusalem. A meeting, rather tense beneath surface politeness, took place between Paul and James (the brother of the Lord and head of the Jerusalem Christians) in which Paul was told to behave as a pious, practicing Jew while at Jerusalem (21:17-25). Yet his presence in the Temple court caused a riot so that a Roman tribune had to intervene to save him, and he had to give a long speech of self-defense in Hebrew (Aramaic? 21:26-22:30). Eventually Paul was brought before a Sanhedrin session and managed to create a dispute between his Sadducee and Pharisee judges, causing the tribune to take him away to Caesarea to be judged by the Roman governor Felix, before whom he again defended himself (23:1-24:21). Felix, however, looking for a bribe, put off judgment and left Paul in prison for two years (24:22-27). Only with the advent of Festus, the next procurator, and the continued charges by the Jewish leaders, was Paul's case taken up again (25:1-26:32). In a trial before Festus, Paul argued that he had committed no crime against Jewish Law or against Caesar. The {436} procurator invited King Herod Agrippa 2 to hear the case; and although neither ruler found Paul guilty, he was sent to Rome as a prisoner because he had appealed to Caesar.

Paul's hazardous sea journey (end of ad 60, beginning of 61) is described with great verve in Ac 27:1-28:14.29 Storms, shipwreck, and a winter spent at Malta culminate in "And thus we came to Rome" (important to Acts theologically: p. 315 above). Paul is said to have stayed there two years under a type of house arrest that enabled him to preach to those who came to him. The sentiment of Paul with which Ac 28:26-28 closes the story (ca. 63), i.e., the Jews will never hear whereas the Gentiles will, is scarcely that expressed by Paul in Rm 11:25-26 (perhaps the last of Paul's undisputed letters), namely that when the Gentiles have come in, all Israel will be saved. Neither the letters nor Acts tells us of his death; but there is good tradition that he was martyred under Nero (EH 2:25.4-8), either about the same time as Peter (ad 64) or somewhat later (67). Tradition would have Paul buried on the Via Ostiensis, a spot commemorated by the basilica of St. Paul outside the Walls.

Remaining Issues.

If Acts is accurate about the terms of Paul's house arrest in Rome (two years), were there further, travels between 63 and the time of his death (64 to 67)? Did he follow his intention to go to Spain? Did Luke show some recollection of that when in Ac 1:8 he had Jesus extend the witness to "the end of the earth"?30 Within thirty years of Paul's death I Clement 5:7 reports that Paul "traveled to the extreme west," before he bore witness to the ruling authorities and died. In discussing Acts the Muratorian Fragment (ca. 180?) makes reference to an account of the departure of Paul from Rome for Spain.

Even more pressing, what are we to think of the geographical information in the Pastoral Letters that would have Paul before his death again visiting Ephesus, Macedonia (from which he writes 1Tm (1:5) to Ephesus), and Greece (with plans to winter at Nicopolis (Tt 3:12))?2 Tm 3:13 suggests an unprepared departure from Troas (because he was arrested?), and 1:8, 16-17 has Paul a prisoner in Rome. If the Pastorals were written by Paul, this information about a "second career" after that described in Acts would have to be treated as historical. If they were written by a Pauline disciple, it might still be historical (drawing on a genuine Pauline itinerary) or it might constitute an imaginative setting for the Letters (but one written in ignorance {437} of Acts; see n. 28 above). Ways of evaluating that will be discussed at the beginning of Chapter 31 below.

B) The Theology of Paul

Pauline theology is a very large subject to which many books have been devoted, as may be seen from the Bibliography at the end of the chapter. Even a sketch is beyond the scope of this Introduction. Possible and fruitful, however, is a listing that supplies orientation on some major issues or problems in the study of Pauline thought so that readers may reflect on them as they study the individual letters.31

(1) Was Paul Consistent? Whether we are dealing with whole letters (deutero Pauline) or parts of letters (e.g., Rm 9-11), judging what is or is not Pauline is to some extent based on conformity with the rest of Pauline thought. Just how consistent was Paul?32 Caution is required. If one isolates the agreed-on genuine letters of Paul (1Thess, 1-2 Cor, Gal, Rom, Phil, Phlm), they certainly do not give us the totality of Paul's theology. Therefore, when one encounters a new idea, e.g., that of the detailed church structure advocated in the Pastorals, it is not so easy to affirm prima facie that this could not come from Paul. One would need to show that this new idea is not reconcilable with Pauline thought. But that criterion presumes that Paul could not or would not change his mind (on theological grounds, not merely as a matter of personal stubbornness). He does say in Ga 1:8: "Even if we or an angel from heaven should proclaim (to you) a gospel other than the one we have preached to you, let that one be anathema." Yet that constancy concerns Paul's basic principle about God's gracious gift of salvation in Christ, independent of the works of the Law. How applicable is such immutability to working out ramifications for Christian life? One might be encouraged to recognize changeableness by 1 Co 9:19-23 where Paul stresses he is all things to all: "To the Jews I became like a Jew to win over Jews;... to those outside the Law I became like one outside the Law to win over those outside the Law." (That statement, however, may not imply lineal but dialectic development.)

Here are some instances of the problem. May one acknowledge a difference going beyond oratory between Ga 5:2, "If you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you," and Rm 3:1-2, "What benefit is {438} there in being circumcised? Much in every way"?33 Could Paul be rethinking with more subtlety the role of circumcision, without, of course, changing his gospel that salvation is possible without it? Such a change might stem from bad reactions at Jerusalem to Paul's caustic criticism of the men who were the pillars of the Jerusalem church (Ga 2:6-9) communicated by those opposed to Paul in Galatia. In Rm 15:30-31 Paul asks Christians at the capital to join in striving for his acceptance at Jerusalem; and could that approach stem from the recognition that in the polemic atmosphere of Gal he had overstated the issue? On another issue, is Paul in 1 Co 10:28-33 (not eating food dedicated to idols lest one scandalize weaker Christians) showing tolerance for what Peter may have been doing at Antioch when he stopped eating meals with Gentiles because it scandalized the men from James - an action that Paul challenged for the sake of the gospel (Ga 2:11-14)? A recognition that from one letter to another Paul's statements are not rigidly consistent does not mean that his thought is incoherent or compliant. Rather this recognition that Paul was far from an ideologue underlines the importance of understanding the circumstances that Paul is addressing in each letter and what he is arguing for or against. Paul's coherence amidst diversity stems in part from his pastoral perception of what he thought people needed to hear, whether they liked it or not. There is a great difference between being all things to all in order to please all, and being all things to all in order to save as many as possible (1 Co 9:22).

(2) What Was Paul's Attitude toward Judaism? With the exception of Romans, Paul's undisputed letters were addressed to audiences he had evangelized himself; and since he regarded himself as having been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, he was writing primarily to Gentiles. Many commentators assume that what Paul told them had universal applicability and would have been said to Jews as well. That seems plausible in relation to his basic gospel of salvation through Christ, but are we sure how he would apply that gospel to Jews? In the preceding paragraph I cited Ga 5:2, where Paul states that it is useless for Gentiles to be circumcised. Yet suppose Paul had married a Jewish woman who came to believe in Christ and they had a son: Would he have refused to have the child circumcised? Certainly he would not have thought that circumcision was necessary for salvation since the child would grow up to believe in Christ. But would Paul not have wanted the child to have the privileges of being an "Israelite" described eloquently in Rm 9:4-5? The Paul of Ac 24:14 states that "according to the Way, which they call a sect, I worship the God of our fathers (i.e., ancestors) {439} believing all things according to Law and what is written in the Prophets." Could or would the historical Paul have said that?34

(3) How Unique Was Paul? Related to the preceding issue is the question of how new or unique or even idiosyncratic Pauline thought was, not only in relation to Judaism but also in relation to his fellow Christians. It is clear that the revelation of God's Son changed Paul's outlook dramatically; but in his Christian approach to questions, how different was he from other prominent or leading Christians? Several factors have prompted a maximalist an swer. Paul's stress on differences from Cephas (Peter) and the men from James in Ga 2:11-14 and his criticism of the superlative apostles in 2 Co 11:5 have shaped the picture of Paul as a loner. Throughout Christian history the study of Paul has prompted important theologians to issue radical chal lenges to the prevailing or popular thought (Marcion, Augustine (against Pe- lagius), M. Luther, K. Barth), and that has been retroverted into the picture of Paul. Yet there are anachronistic dangers in such retroversion; e.g., as K. Stendahl has pointed out, Luther's struggle with guilt and sin cannot be used to interpret Paul's outlook on his preChristian past.35 Ga 2:9 has James, Cephas (Peter), and John give the right hand of fellowship to Paul, and 1 Co 15:3-11 has Paul join himself to Cephas* the Twelve, James, and all the apostles in a common preaching and a common belief. We may ask, then, whether in seeing a certain harmony between Peter and Paul (Acts, I Clem ent 5:2-5) and expressing in a benevolent way Peter's problems with Paul (2 Pt 3:15-16), later works were simply domesticating Paul or validly pre serving an insight that he was not hostilely isolated.36

(4) Was Paul the Creator of High Christology? In certain strands of liberal thought Jesus was simply a Jewish peasant of a reformist bent, criticizing hypocrisy and some of the entrenched religious attitudes and institutions of his time. Paul, it is claimed, hellenized the memory, making Jesus the Son of God; and in that sense Paul was really the founder of the Christian reli gion. Few would express the contrast so crudely today, but some of the ten dency to make Paul the architect of high christology continues. That is chal lenged in essentials by the realization that Paul scarcely created for Jesus titles like Son of God or the Lord (in an absolute sense) since they had their {440} roots in Palestinian (and even Semitic-speaking) Christianity.37 Indeed, there is a trend in centrist critical scholarship to see considerable continuity between the christology of Jesus' lifetime and the christology of Paul (see BINTC).

(5) What Is the Theological Center of Paul's Theology? Although they widely agree that one should not impose on Paul the organizational prin ciples of later theology, scholars are far from agreement on the key issue in Paul's thought. The Reformation emphasis on justification by faith still has followers, e.g., Käsemann, with modifications. F. C. Baur stressed the antith esis between human flesh and the divine Spirit. Bultmann gives the main thrust to anthropology because the Pauline affirmations concerning God re late the deity to human beings; thus he would divide Paul's thought under the headings: "The human being prior to the revelation of faith" and "The human being under faith." A concept of salvation-history is seen as central to many who do not drive a sharp wedge between Paul and Judaism.38 Beker stresses a Jewish apocalyptic context: the Christ-event as the consummation and end of history. Fitzmyer prefers the language of "eschatological" over "apocalyptic" and speaks of christocentric soteriology: Christ crucified and raised for our sanctification. All these have their element of truth, provided we realize that they are analytical judgments and that probably Paul never thought out "the center of his theology." He did express himself, however, about his "gospel," and christocentrism is closest to that (see Rm 1:3-4; Rm 4:24-25).

(6) Is There a Central Pauline Narrative ? In place of a central theological theme some scholars have thought of a narrative. Just as Judaism had a basic story of how God chose and called Israel through Moses (a story shared by Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, and nationalist extremists), so also, some would logically suppose, Christians had a basic story that retold God's choice of Israel by recalling how God had renewed the call through the min istry, crucifixion, and resurrection of Jesus. Surely Paul had preached the story about Jesus when he first came to a site.39 Accordingly we cannot judge Paul's gospel from his letters because those presume the "story" about Jesus he had recounted when he first came to the community addressed, a story {441} difficult to reconstruct from what underlies the letters. In many ways this "commonsense" approach to Paul is more convincing than any presentation wherein he was abstractly systematic in his thought.

(7) What Does Paul Mean by "Righteousness" and "Justification"? Since Reformation times, righteousness (dikaiosyne) has been a major issue in Pauline studies. As mentioned in (5), some would make it the center of Pau line theology, even though the theme is notoriously absent from an early letter like I Thess.40 (Perhaps "justification" was not Paul's first formulation of what happened through Christ; it may represent language honed in the battles with Jewish Christian missionaries in Galatia.) In numerous passages Paul speaks of "the righteousness of God." With the help of Qumran evi dence it is now widely recognized that this phraseology echoes a Jewish apocalyptic description of God's covenant graciousness in the context of judgment. For Paul, it describes God's powerful salvific act through faith in Jesus Christ. The other side of the coin is the effect of the Christ-event: justification (dikaiosis; verb: dikaioun, "to justify"), i.e., the relationship of human beings to God effected by God's gracious, unmerited action in Christ: They now stand before God acquitted or innocent. The Reformation debate about whether God simply declares people upright (usually identified as the Protestant position) or actually makes them upright by transforming them (the Catholic position) may be asking for a precision that lies beyond Paul's explicit thinking.41

(8) How Do the Deutero Pauline Writings Fit into the Pauline Picture? Six letters are involved: 2 Thess, Col, Ep, 1-2Tm , Titus.42 If in fact they were not written by Paul, were they all written by Pauline disciples so that they represent a genuine continuity? Can change of circumstances explain differ ences of emphasis from Paul's undisputed letters? Overenthusiasm about the endtimes can explain a corrective emphasis in 2 Thess, while Col and even Ep can be seen as a development of Paul's own view of the body of Christ in the light of a larger view of the church toward the end of the century. Some would find the emphasis on church structure in the Pastorals so foreign to Paul's own interests that those letters would have to be regarded as an alien implant. However, the structure of settled communities that would {442} enable them to survive was surely a more important question after Paul's lifetime than during it, and so how decisive is the historical Paul's failure to be interested in it? Prima facie, the author of the Pastorals thought his ideas so close to those of Paul that he used the name of the apostle. Do we have sufficient evidence to contradict his judgment? Further discussions of this will be offered in Chapters 25 and 30 below.

An Appreciation of Paul

A) Images of Paul

B) Paul's Motivation

C) Paul's Living Heritage

The preceding two Chapters offer general information that will enable readers to appreciate the Pauline letters when we discuss them individually. Yet in writing those Chapters I have been somewhat embarrassed because they survey the very material that made me restive in the first courses about Paul that I attended. We students had to memorize letter outlines and make maps of the journeys of Paul; the professors spent hours discussing Pauline chronology and whether he went to South Galatia or North Galatia. In my own teaching I have come to recognize that much of that is important; but I have not forgotten that such an emphasis engendered no love for Paul and, at least in some of my classmates, proved a permanent block to savoring the heritage he left. The Gospels engendered spontaneous attraction, but Paul's letters necessitated laborious plodding. Accordingly I want to add a different kind of introductory Chapter, i.e., one centered on appreciating this man who did more than anyone else in his time to lead people to see what Jesus Christ meant for the world.

A) Images of Paul

What image does Paul evoke? Most of the well-known paintings or statues of Paul are imaginative recreations of dramatic moments in Acts, showing Paul being struck from his horse on the road to Damascus, or Paul debating with the philosophers in the halls of a school in Athens, or Paul being shipwrecked on his sea journey to Rome. Occasionally there is a chiaroscuro of a bald-headed Paul writing a letter in the flickering light of a candle. The common symbolism of Paul with a sword echoes the tradition that Paul was martyred by beheading in Rome.

Paul's own words do not seem to have fed the artistic fancy. Yet his writing is the most autobiographical in the NT; indeed in the whole Bible only Jeremiah matches Paul in self-revelation. In particular, one passage creates indelible images:

Often near death; five times I have received thirty-nine lashes from Jews; three times I have been beaten with rods; once I was stoned; three times I {447} have been shipwrecked; a night and a day I passed on the watery deep; on frequent journeys; in dangers from rivers; in dangers from bandits; in dangers from (my own) kind; in dangers from Gentiles; in dangers in the city; in dangers in the wilderness; in dangers on the sea; in dangers from false brethren; in toil and hardship; many times without sleep; in hunger and thirst; many times not eating; cold and not clothed; and besides other things there is on me the daily pressure constituted by anxiety for the churches. Who is weak and I am not weak? Who is made to stumble into sin, and I am not indignant? (2 Co 11:23-29)

To appreciate the awesome reality of that description modern readers may need some background. For instance, "frequent journeys" gives a vivid mental picture if one understands the difficulties they entailed.1 It is often affirmed that the famous Roman road network facilitated the spread of Christianity, and films about Roman times picture chariots dashing along the roads paved with hard rock. Undoubtedly Paul took advantage of such roads when he could, but in many regions he would not have had such a luxury. Moreover, Paul was an itinerant artisan who would have had to struggle to get money for food; a wheeled vehicle would have been beyond his means. Horseback travel was difficult; for horses were not used for long distances, and skill was required in riding (given the absence of the saddles and stirrups that we know). Probably Paul would not even have been able or willing to spend money for a donkey to carry his baggage, for soldiers were prone to requisition these animals from travelers who could not offer resistance. And so we have to picture Paul trudging along the roads, carrying his limited possessions in a sack, at the maximum covering twenty miles a day.

At times when he could earn some money with his leatherworking skills and his travel pattern brought him to an inn, he may have been able to rent an overnight spot there - a place on the ground in the courtyard near the fire, or, more expensively, a bed (probably infested with bugs) in a room off the yard. Often, however, he had to sleep somewhere near the road, amidst the cold, rain, and snow. As a poor man he would have been easily victimized by brigands, especially in country areas that were less efficiently controlled by police. Sea journeys were not much safer. Coming east the winds helped, but going west was dangerous; and in either direction there were many shipwrecks. Being a passenger on the open deck of a cargo boat, eating the limited provisions one had brought aboard, was really not much more comfortable than travel on land.

The difficulties were not over when Paul arrived at his intended destination. {448} Today those who walk through the magnificent ruins of a city like Ephe-sus cannot help but recognize the grandeur and power of Greco-Roman culture embodied in majestic buildings, shrines, temples, and statues. Yet here was a Jew with a knapsack on his back who hoped to challenge all that in the name of a crucified criminal before whom, he proclaimed, every knee in heaven, on earth, and under the earth had to bend. The contempt and mockery of the sophisticated Gentiles for this babbling ragpicker of ideas reported in Ac 17:18 ring true. Further, the Acts accounts of his being hauled before magistrates and imprisoned throw light on Paul's report of "dangers from the Gentiles." Those dangers might have been bearable if his own "kind" (genos, "race, stock"; 2 Co 11:26) had given him a warm reception when he proclaimed a Messiah descended from David. But both Acts and Paul's letters portray struggle and hostility. Paul did not have the status to command a place in a public building for his message; Ac 16:13 has him preaching at a place of prayer by a riverside. Frequently he must have preached where he lived and worked, namely, in the tenement houses-with-shops of the larger cities. According to Acts he found his way into synagogue house-meetings where often enough he was unwelcome (because he was addressing the Gentiles and stirring up trouble?); that is confirmed by the five times he received the punishment of thirty-nine lashes "from Jews," a punishment associated with synagogue discipline. Paul himself testifies to the fact that his struggles were not over when he brought people to believe in Christ. He devotes much of Gal to countering other Christians whom he considered "false brethren" because they undermined his work by attempting to preach another gospel. The Corinthian correspondence also shows vividly his anxiety for the churches.

B) Paul's Motivation

Why did Paul subject himself to all this "grief"? Before a dramatic moment in the mid-30s of the 1st century ad Paul had been at peace with his upbringing, with himself, and with his God. The Greek style of his letters shows that he was adequately educated in the dominant Greco-Roman culture. In terms of the Jewish tradition he claims to be advanced beyond many of his contemporaries (Ga 1:14). Seemingly he was well connected with the religious authorities in Palestine.2 As for religious observance, he was blameless (Ph 3:5-6). What brought about a drastic change whereby all this became so much "dross"? Ac 9:3-8 and Ga 1:12,16 offer a partial {449} explanation: God was pleased to reveal "His Son" Jesus Christ to Paul. "I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord" (Ph 3:8). Revelation and knowledge, however, do not adequately explain the driven missionary we have seen above, the "new creature" (to use Paul's own language:2 Co 5:17). Nor does scholarly speculation as to whether that revelation brought immediate insight into what Christ meant for the Gentiles who could be justified without performing the works of the Law. Something far more significant had happened on a personal level.

In the revelation Paul, who already knew the love shown by the God of his Israelite ancestors, discovered a love that went beyond his previous imagination. He felt "taken over" by Christ Jesus (Ph 3:12). With awe Paul exclaims: "The Son of God loved me and gave himself for me" (Ga 2:20). What he avows in Rm 8:35-37 must have been uttered many times in the travails described above: "Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will anguish or persecution or famine or nakedness or peril or the sword?... In all these things we are conquerors because of him who loved us." This love became the driving factor of Paul's life when he came to understand how encompassing it was: "The love of Christ impels us once we come to the conviction that one died for all" (2 Co 5:14).

And how can people know the love of Christ unless they hear about it? "And how are they to hear without a preacher? And how can there be preachers unless they are sent?" (Rm 10:14-15). Thus the mission to the Gentiles who would otherwise not hear is not for Paul an abstract conclusion, but an inevitable translation into action of the overflowing love that he had experienced. Although Paul offers arguments for his position that Gentiles were not bound to accept the observance of the Law of circumcision, his most basic argument would have been existential: They had to become aware of the love manifested by God in Christ, and nothing must be allowed to stand in the way. Paul's attitude toward the Law for the sake of the Gentiles was part of his being all things to all that they might be saved (1Co9:21-22).

The hardships encountered in the mission became for Paul more than means to be endured toward an end. If the love of God was manifested in the self-giving of Christ, how could the love of Christ be shown to others except in the same way? "We were ready to share with you not only the gospel of God but also our own selves" (1 Th 2:8). By Paul's carrying about in his body the death of Jesus, the life of Jesus was revealed (2 Co 4:10). "If we are afflicted, it is for your encouragement" (2 Co 1:6). To bring an end to divisions at Corinth, Paul offered an extraordinarily moving description of love. His own experience was what caused him to affirm that of all the gifts or charisms given by God in Christ, "the greatest is love." {450} (1 Co 13:13). In the language of 1 Co 13, in order to preach a Christ who embodied the love of God, Paul had to be patient in his love and endure all things. Amid discouragements Paul had drawn on the love of Christ in order to hope for all things; and he had to be sure that the love that burned in him remained Christ's, not seeking its own interests or brooding over injury. In response to God's love whereby "Christ died for us while we were still sinners" (Rm 5:8), it behooved Paul to rejoice when Christ was proclaimed even by those who were seeking to harm Paul (Ph 1:17-18).

In the Chapters to follow we shall discuss whether, where, and when Paul wrote each letter; whether some of them were glued together from several letters; and whether he went to North Galatia or only South Galatia. We shall try to unravel what precisely Paul meant by justification and the righteousness of God; and whether "the faith of Christ" means Christian faith in Christ or Christ's own faith. But our reflections on all such issues must be qualified by the underlying awareness that Paul would grind his teeth if anyone thought any of that was other than dross when compared with experiencing the all-encompassing love of Christ, the goal to which he had devoted every waking hour. As for his own importance, although he is remembered even today as the most zealous proponent of Christ in the NT, he would remind his admirers: "I am the least of the apostles, indeed unfit to be called an apostle... Yet it is by the grace of God I am what I am, and God's grace toward me has not been in vain" (1 Co 15:9-10). Because of that grace he could not be defeated: "The transcendent power comes from God, not from us. We are afflicted in every way possible, but we are not crushed; we have our doubts, but we never despair; we are persecuted, but we are never forsaken; we are struck down, but we are never annihilated" (2 Co 4:7-8).

C) Paul's Living Heritage

A major component in appreciating Paul is the heritage he left: those whom he brought to Christ; his letters; his disciples and their writings.

Those Whom Paul Brought to Christ. As explained in Chapter 15, Thanksgivings are part of the letter format of this period, but Paul's have their own peculiarities. Surely he was following his heart as well as form when he gave thanks for those who had been chosen to experience God's love in Christ even as he had, and so were not lacking in any spiritual gift (1 Co 1:7). They were his hope, his joy, his crown, the stars in his universe (1 Th 2:19-20; Ph 2:15). He was comforted by their faith; indeed he can say, "We now live if you stand firm in the Lord" (1 Th 3:8). "For as God is my witness, how I long for all of you with the affection of Christ Jesus" (Ph 1:8). Paul was their father in Christ Jesus (1 Co 4:15; 1 Th 2:11); {451} he was in labor like a mother until Christ was formed in them (Ga 4:19), and as gentle with them as a nursing mother (1 Th 2:7). They were his brothers and sisters. Indeed he could call the Philippians (1:7) his partners in the gospel. They completed his joy by being of the same mind about Christ, united in heart with the same love (Ph 2:2,5).

At times Paul could be harsh: He chastised the Galatians bitterly and called them fools (3:1); he warned the Corinthians that when he came again, he would not be lenient (2 Co 13:2). Yet he insisted, "I wrote to you with many tears, not that you might be pained but that you might know the abundant love I have for you" (2 Co 2:4). And he could issue a challenge that few others in Christian history have ever dared to make: "Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ" (1 Co 11:1; also 4:16); and many of those addressed did find Christ in Paul: "You became imitators of us and of the Lord" (1 Th 1:6). That this claim was not self-serving arrogance may be seen from Paul's indignant reaction when some at Corinth confused adherence to him with adherence to Christ: "Was Paul crucified for you?" (1 Co 1:13). Though Paul had failures, the enduring love of his converts and their gratitude for what he revealed of Christ were a major tribute to his apostleship.

Paul's Letters. No other follower of Jesus in NT times left behind a written testimony comparable to that of Paul. True, Luke-Acts (ca. 37,800 words) is longer than the thirteen letters attributed to Paul (32,350 words); but we scarcely know the Lucan author, whereas Paul's personality stands out in his letters. He claims not to be oratorical: "My speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom" (1 Co 2:4; 2 Co 11:6); yet ironically it is the current vogue in scholarship to expend considerable effort detecting the mode of Greek oratory that he employed. For ordinary readers, however, such classification contributes little to the appreciation of Paul, because whether he is judged by his own self-deprecation (not adept in oratory) or by Aristotelian standards (using oratorical techniques), the way he communicates his love of Christ is often unforgettable. In the whole library of Christianity it is hard to match his impassioned eloquence. To what has already been cited, we may add the following samples. "I died to the Law that I might live for God. I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me" (Ga 2:19-20). "For me to live is Christ, and to die is gain" (Ph 1:21). "I decided not to know anything among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified" (1 Co 2:2). "Be it far from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ through which the world is crucified to me and I to the world" (Ga 6:14). "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love" (Ga 5:6). "I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor present things, nor future things, {452} nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in creation will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Rm 8:38-39). That eloquence has been a key factor in the ongoing appreciation of Paul by audiences in places and times that he would have never envisioned.

Paul's Disciples and Their Writings. Paul was a man of great intensity and a wide range of emotions. He must also have been a man capable of engendering deep friendship, for Paul's letters give evidence of extraordinary loyalty on the part of a wide cast of characters.3 Timothy, Titus, and Silvanus are seen over a number of years carrying Paul's letters and messages, and sometimes acting as ambassadors in very difficult circumstances; apparently their devotion was never in question. Aquila and Prisca (Priscilla) were willing to pick up stakes and move with Paul from Corinth to Ephesus, and then to go ahead to Rome in anticipation of his arrival. The slave Onesi-mus attached himself to Paul even at the price of offending his master (Phlm), and both Onesimus and the woman deacon Phoebe (whom Paul thinks of as a "sister": Rm 16:1-2) are warmly recommended by the apostle.

Beyond those and other named disciples and companions, a lasting appreciation of Paul stems from the pens of those who themselves remained anonymous while writing about him or in his name. The author of Acts (Luke?) has often been criticized for not fully understanding Paul's theology, for highlighting themes that were not Pauline (salvation-history), for simplifying Paul's career, and for avoiding many of the controversies in Paul's life. We should not overlook, however, the extraordinary tribute he paid by devoting to Paul half the book's lengthy description of the spread of Christianity. Whether or not Paul was that important in the estimation of non Pauline Christians, Acts has forever placed Paul alongside Peter in the Christian "pantheon" as the two most important figures in the following of Jesus. In his own writing Paul speaks of God's revelation of the divine Son "in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles" (Ga 1:16). But would subsequent Christianity have understood the full ramifications of that plan without Acts' dramatization that began Paul's story in Jerusalem, the Jewish capital, and led him to Rome, the Gentile capital where he spoke definitively about the future direction of Christianity toward the Gentiles? Again Acts has fleshed out in an unforgettable way the travels, imprisonments, and afflic- {453}tions the apostle describes. Paul says, "To the Jews I became like a Jew in order to win over Jews;... to those outside the Law I became like one outside the Law... in order to win over those outside the Law" (1Co9:20-21). Acts graphically embodies that adaptability in the different sermons attributed to Paul: When he addresses a synagogue (Ac 13:15-41), most of what he says is derived from the OT; when he stands in the middle of the Athenian Areopagus (17:22-31), he not only uses more literary Greek but also quotes philosophers. Paul's last discourse, addressed to the elders of Ephesus (Ac 20:17-38), sums up beautifully his career and captures the tender love of his converts for him. Paul's own writings may be remarkably autobiographical, but the biography in Acts contributed enormously to his image.

A greater tribute to Paul came from those disciples who in his name wrote the pseudonymous deutero Pauline literature (see Chapter 25 below).4 Apparently a half-dozen authors found the apostle, even after his death, an enduring authority to speak to the churches in the last third of the 1st century. For instance, 2 Thessalonians shows Paul facing the great evil of the end-time and reassuring his Christian converts. Paul's life among them continues to be a model they should imitate: "Be firm and hold on to the traditions you were taught by our word or letter" (2:15).

Even more impressive is the contribution of the author of Colossians. Master of a graceful liturgical style, he developed with new depth Pauline themes of christology, ecclesiology, and eschatology. Scholars debate the authentic Pauline tonality of some of the magnificent affirmations of Col; perhaps a more meaningful question is whether Paul would not have been pleased to have them incorporated in his heritage. In his lifetime Paul thought largely of local churches; but, along with Col, would he not have seen the necessity to apply his ideas to the larger vision of church now developing? In any case, Paul's ongoing influence is beautifully illustrated by the appeal to his sufferings in Col 1:24- an appeal all the more impressive if Paul was already dead ("absent in the flesh but with you in spirit" (2:5) in a more profound sense). Paul's use of "mystery" and "body" has inspired in Col a luxuriant development of these motifs; and Paul's speaking to the domestic problems of husband, wife, and slave has been systematized and reshaped in a household code (Col 3:18-4:1). The hymn in Col 1:15-20 is a worthy companion to that offered by Paul himself in Ph 2:5-11.

{454} Probably Ephesians, although close to Col, was the contribution of another admirer, the most talented of the Pauline writing disciples. We noted above Paul's own impassioned eloquence about Christ. Matching that are the words attributed to Paul in Ep 3:8: "To me, even though I am the very least of all the saints, was given the grace to preach to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ"; and in 3:17-19: "That Christ may dwell through faith in your hearts, that rooted and grounded in love,... you may know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God." If Paul professed that at the name given to the exalted Jesus every knee should bow in heaven, on earth, and under the earth (Ph 2:9-10), equally majestic is the description in Ep 1:20-21 of what God "worked in Christ by raising him from the dead and seating him at His right hand in the heavens, far above every... name that is named not only in this age but also in the one to come." While Paul stresses the theme of "one" (body, bread, spirit, mind:1 Co 10:17; Ph 1:27; Rm 12:5), he never reached the grandeur of the description he motivated in Ep 4:4-6: one body, one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all. To imitate the master is one form of appreciation; to be inspired by him to go farther is an even greater contribution to his heritage.

The Pastoral Letters (Titus, 1-2Tm) have sometimes been dismissed as unworthy of the Pauline corpus because of their pedestrian concern with church structure, diatribes against heretical dangers, and downgrading of women. Certainly the writer (or writers) did not have the elegance of some of the deutero Paulinists just discussed. Yet the very concern that caused these letters to be called "Pastoral" is faithful to Paul, and he might have become more systematic if faced with dangerous church disintegration at the end of the century. Moreover, a general disparagement does not do justice to some admirable passages, e.g., the hymnic language of Tt 3:4-7; 1 Tm 3:16; 1 Tm 6:15-16, and the moving "sure (faithful) saying" of 1 Tm 1:15: "Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of which I am the foremost." There is a really remarkable capturing of the Pauline spirit in 2Tm (the last written work in the corpus?). Who could hope for an epitaph more poignant than: "I have fought the good fight; I have finished the race; I have kept the faith. For the rest there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness which the Lord, the righteous judge, will grant to me on that day" (2 Tm 4:7)? And the heritage goes on, for Paul has prepared a new generation who can be just as effective as he was: "Stir into flame the gift of God that is within you... God did not give us a spirit of timidity but of power and love" (1:6-7).

Beyond that tribute the author of 2Tm realizes that the bequest of the great preacher, apostle, and teacher (1:11) is not dependent on a generation {455} or two of disciples. In 2:8-9 Paul is heard to say that he is suffering in chains for the sake of the gospel; then he cries out defiantly, "But the word of God is not chained." The ultimate gift of Paul is to have preached a gospel that had enormous power in itself and therefore could not be chained or silenced even when its proponents were. Readers who keep in mind the apostle whose preaching unchained the gospel will not allow the Pauline message to be buried beneath details as we now consider the thirteen NT writings that bear Paul's name.

{456}

The First Letter to the Thessalonians

The Background

Basic Information

General Analysis of the Message

Issues and Problems for Reflection

As the oldest preserved Christian writing, this document has a special significance even outside the Pauline corpus. Within the corpus 1Th has at times been neglected because it does not treat the great Pauline theme of justification by faith apart from the works of the Law. Yet that very attitude raises issues of Pauline theology to which readers were alerted in Chapter 16. Can our evaluation of the importance of a Pauline letter be independent of the relation of the letter to the life-situation for and in which it was composed? Is not the expression of Pauline thought shaped by the needs of the particular community (perhaps in this case one not affected by the dispute over the works of the Law)? Or if there was growth in Paul's thought, might we be hearing here a younger Paul - still very close to his experiences in the church of Antioch, but not yet honed by the Galatian crisis that brought the issue of justification to the fore in his thought (Chapter 10 above, n. 102)? The questions just asked imply that an introductory treatment of the Background of Paul's dealing with the addressees is important for understanding Thess (or, indeed, any Pauline letter). Then the General Analysis will supply guidance as readers go through the text of the letter, and subsections will cover Issues for reflection and Bibliography.

The Background

Paul, with Silas and Timothy,1 had crossed over from the province of Asia (Asia Minor or present-day Turkey) to Macedonia (Europe, present-day northern Greece) ca. ad 50. Within a relatively short time he would move through Macedonia to Achaia (southern Greece) stopping at Philippi, Thes-salonica, Beroea, Athens, and Corinth. Perhaps missions from Jerusalem had brought the name of Christ to Europe earlier;2 but this was a major step in {457}

Basic Information

Date: The oldest preserved Christian document: 50 or 51 in the Traditional Chronology, during Paul's (Second Missionary) journey, undertaken after the meeting in Jerusalem (or 41-43 in the Revisionist Chronology,* before the Jerusalem meeting). From: Corinth within a few months of Paul's preaching at Thessalonica. To: The Christians at Thessalonica, probably of mixed Gentile and Jewish origin. Authenticity: Not seriously doubted today.

Unity: That two letters have been combined to make up 1Th has been suggested by a small number of respected scholars (e.g., W. Schmithals), but unity is overwhelmingly asserted.

Integrity: The Pauline authorship of 2:13-16 is strongly affirmed by the majority; see Issue 2 below. A few look on 5:1-11 as an addition to the letter.

Formal Division:

A. Opening Formula: 1:1

B. Thanksgiving: 1:2-5 or 1:2-10; or a longer Thanksgiving 1:2-3:13, subdivided into first (1:2-2:12) and second (2:13-3:13)

C. Body: 2:1-3:13 (or 1:6-3:13): Pauline indicative (relationship to Thessalonians)

4:1-5:22: Pauline imperative (instructions, exhortations)

D. Concluding Formula: 5:23-28.

Division According to Contents:

1:1-10: Address/greeting and Thanksgiving

2:1-12: Paul's behavior at Thessalonica

2:13-16: Further Thanksgiving about the reception of the gospel

2:17-3:13: Timothy's mission and Paul's present relationship to the Thessalonian church

4:1-12: Ethical admonitions and exhortations 4:13-5:11: Instructions about the parousia 5:12-22: Instructions about church life 5:23-28: Concluding blessing, greeting (with a kiss, see pp. 418-19 above).

* For the two Chronologies see Table 6 in Chapter 16 above.

Paul's proclaiming the gospel, and his concerns in later years would often be directed toward the churches established in the evangelization of Greece. His first preaching was at Philippi where he "suffered and was shamefully treated" (1 Th 2:2).3 Then proceeding some 100 miles west along the Via Egnatia, the great Roman road across northern Greece, Paul and his companions came to Thessalonica,4 where he proclaimed the gospel "not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction"

{458} (1 Th 1:5). How long he stayed there is uncertain. In a compressed and highly stylized picture, Ac 17:2 mentions three consecutive Sabbaths at the synagogue,5 and afterwards indicates a ministry centered around the house of Jason (17:5-9), followed by a hasty departure. Besides preaching, Paul (1 Th 2:9) recalls that he had labored and toiled, slaving night and day, so that he would not be a financial burden; and in Ph 4:16 he remembers that the Philippians sent money to him at Thessalonica several times - a description that suggests more than a few weeks' stay.

Thessalonica was a city with a Jewish community but marked by a multiplicity of cults, reflecting the mixture of the population. Archaeology and historical records indicate places for worshiping the Roman pantheon and the emperor,6 as well as a host of Oriental deities, e.g., Cabirus (Kabiroi), Isis, Serapis, and Osiris. The letter that Paul writes back to his converts at Thessalonica who "broke with the worship of false gods" (1:9) implies that they were Gentiles, and (4:1) that they were largely of the working class. Ac 17:4 may not be too askew, then, in reporting that at Thessalonica, although Paul preached first in the synagogue, converting some who heard him there, eventually he attracted many God-fearers and Gentiles.7 Also Paul's tentmaking, leatherworking trade would have brought him into contact with Gentiles who made their livelihood in a similar way. (Acts is probably mentioning only the more prominent people.) In 1 Th 2:2 Paul speaks of "great opposition" at Thessalonica. This might be related to Ac 17:5-10, where Paul's success with the Gentiles angered a group of Jews who in turn aroused the marketplace crowds against him, causing him to flee the city with Silas. Such an enforced hasty departure leaving things unfinished could explain Paul's writing back after he had been gone only a short time (1 Th 2:17) and his intense desire to revisit, so that, being thwarted (2:18), he sent Timothy back from Athens to Thessalonica8 to prevent the Christians there {459} from being unsettled by hardships (3:2-5) and by what they were suffering from their "compatriots" (2:14-15). What were these hardships and sufferings? It is not unlikely that the opposition that Paul faced from both Gentiles and Jews continued after he left and afflicted his converts.9 Presumably the "compatriots" he mentions were Gentiles, and yet Paul also compares the sufferings of the Thessalonian Christians to what the churches of God in Judea suffered from the Jews who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets. In the gospel picture the Jewish authorities effected the death of Jesus through the cooperation of the Roman magistrate, even as Ac 17:5-6,13 would have some Jews at Thessalonica stirring up street rabble and magistrates (presumably Gentile) against Paul. With that background of relationship between Paul and the Thessalonian Christians, what does he say in the letter written shortly after he preached among them?

General Analysis of the Message

Because Paul's thought shifts back and forth in the letter, I shall not attempt a purely sequential Analysis.10 Rather let me suggest that readers go through 1Th quickly to get a surface impression of the contents, and then they may find useful this Analysis that highlights the main issues.

Clearly Paul cared for the Thessalonians. He addresses them as his "brothers" (= brothers and sisters) some fourteen times - proportionate to the letter's length this is an intense usage. One way of translating 2:8 is "Having been separated from you, we were ready to share with you not only the gospel of God but also our very own selves." Sometimes Paul benevolently flatters his addressees, but one gets a sense that he was genuinely relieved when Timothy returned to him (at Corinth) with the good news that the Thessalonian Christians had not been unsettled by affliction (3:3) and were holding firm in the Lord (3:6-8). "How can we thank God enough for you, for all the joy that we feel before our God on your account?" (3:9). Indeed, they seem to have taken up the challenge to spread faith in Christ by making the word of the Lord ring out elsewhere in Macedonia and Greece (Achaia; {460} 1:7-8; see 4:10). Thus Paul, who cannot come to them soon and perhaps now feels less need to do so, is able to write this gentle letter in which there is encouragement to do more (4:10) but little expressed reproof11 or major new instructions. Indeed, throughout most of it, using oratorical style, Paul is able to appeal to what the Thessalonians already know.12 A major exception is 4:13-5:11 where he teaches something new. Presumably his reminders and/or his new teaching respond to issues reported by Timothy and questions proposed by the Thessalonians. Precisely to what extent, however, is Paul motivated by specific dangers or trends present in Thessalonica and by the religious, political, and cultural shaping of those who had come to believe in Jesus in that city?13 Let us examine that issue in more detail under the rubric of two questions.

First, why in much of the letter does Paul remind the Thessalonians of things they already know? On the simplest level, any community that consisted largely of Gentiles converted after a relatively brief missionary visit by Paul had made an enormous change in accepting belief in the one God of Israel who was also the Father of Jesus Christ; and so reinforcement by recalling what had been preached would be appropriate indeed. More specifically Donfried, "Cults" 338-42, thinks that frenzied Pagan religious observances (Dionysus, Cabiri) at Thessalonica were background for Paul's warnings in 4:3-8: "Stay away from impurity"; "not in lustful passion like the Gentiles who do not know God"; "God has not called us to uncleanness but to holiness."14 That is an interesting suggestion; yet others argue that much of the archaeological evidence pertinent to the Pagan religions comes from a later time, and so its applicability to the Thessalonica that Paul knew is disputed (see H. Koester in TTC 442-44).

Again Donfried, "Cults" 347-52, points out comparative situational possibilities in 1 Th 1:6; 1 Th 2:2,14; 1 Th 3:3 where Paul writes of affliction and opposition. Was part of the problem the strange exclusivity of this Christian group whose converts abandoned the public religion? In particular, did Paul's proc- {461} lamation of the gospel of the one God of Israel and the Lord Jesus Christ cause affliction and persecution in a city where Roman civic cult was so strong? (Ac 17:7 makes the charge specific: Paul's preaching of Jesus as a king contradicts the decrees of Caesar.) Does Paul need to remind the Thessalonians that he himself underwent suffering when he preached there (2:2) because he is being accused of cowardice in having fled the city and left others to face the results of his preaching (Ac 17:9-10)? In the brief time after Paul's departure from Thessalonica were believers put to death, whence the issue of the fate of the dead in Christ (1 Th 4:16)? Or is Malherbe (Paul 46-48) correct in suggesting that the affliction and the suffering of which Paul speaks are not external persecution but internal distress and isolation? That certainly may have been part of the picture; yet in looking back on his activity a few years later (2 Co 11:23-27) Paul speaks of physical beatings, attempts on his life, and external dangers both from Jews and Gentiles; and in Rm 8:35-36, in reference to "the sword" (if he is not being purely rhetorical), he raises the issue of Christians being killed. Physical harassment and persecution had occurred in the earlier years of Paul's mission. There is still another possibility for what Paul refers to by affliction. He reminds his readers of his behavior as a preacher at Thessalonica in 1 Th 2:1-13. They had seen that he did not evangelize with impure motives or deception, or with flattery or greed, or seeking praise but gently as a nursing mother (2:7) and as a loving father (2:11), blamelessly preaching not a human word but the word of God. Was this reminder provoked by charges made against him by those afflicting the church there? Was he being compared to the stereotype of the crude and avaricious wandering Cynic philosopher peddling his message?15 This charge would have been particularly galling to Paul, who argued that he was an apostle of Christ who preached the gospel or word of God (2:2,8,13). Indeed, he echoed Jesus: "You have been taught by God in the love of one another" (4:9; see also "word of the Lord" in 4:15).

Second, why in 4:13-5:11, instead of reminding the Thessalonians of what they already know, does Paul indicate that they need further precision? Paul had a strongly apocalyptic or eschatological understanding of what God had done in Christ: The death and resurrection of Jesus marked the change of times, so that all were now living in the endtime. This was a message of {462} hope for all who believed;16 and Paul had taught the Thessalonians about the ultimate fulfillment of that hope, namely, Christ's second coming17 from heaven to be seen by all (1 Th 1:10; 1 Th 4:16-17). As they underwent affliction and suffering, this expectation supplied strength. Yet, probably because he thought this would take place soon, Paul did not broach the issue of believers who would be dead before that coming. He may not have anticipated how quickly some would be put to death for Christ. Now, perhaps because the Thessalonians asked for instructions, Paul wishes to be specific, drawing on the implication of what he had taught about the salvific value of the death and resurrection of Jesus. Christians may grieve for their dead but not like "others who have no hope" (4:13). Once the parousia has begun, "those who have fallen asleep in Christ" will be raised and together with the living they shall be taken up to meet the Lord in the air (4:14-17). No time or date can be attached to all this; indeed it will come suddenly, so that they should be careful to stay wide awake and sober (5:1-11). Yet overall, the thought of the parousia of the Lord Jesus Christ is encouraging: "Whether we are awake or asleep (in death) we shall still live united to him" (5:10). Notice that the Paul of 1 Thess is not interested in the details of the parousia as such; his pastoral concern is to calm any disturbance in the community he had evangelized.

Issues and Problems for Reflection

(1) In this Introduction we shall not be able to spend much time on exact details of the structure of Pauline letters (beyond the overview in Chapter 15 above), but the unusual pattern of 1 Thess is worth noting. Paul mentions co-senders Silvanus and Timothy18 in the Opening Formula but does not identify himself (or them) as an apostle or servant of Christ, as he will do frequently in future letters (yet see 2:6). The Thanksgiving begins in 1:2. Does the expression of thanks in 1 Th 2:13 belong to the Body of the letter, constituting a second Thanksgiving after 1:2? Or does the Thanksgiving of {463} the letter extend to the end of chap. 3?19 In part, this issue is related to the next question below.

(2) Is 2:13-16 an original part of 1 Thess written by Paul or was it added by a later editor?20 It refers to "the Jews who killed the Lord Jesus" and generalizes about them in hostile terms. If written by Paul, who certainly had been in Jerusalem in the 30s, it constitutes a very early, major refutation of the revisionist theory that the Romans were almost exclusively respon sible for Jesus' death. Arguments against Pauline authorship of 1 Th 2:13-16 include: (a) It constitutes a second Thanksgiving in the letter; (b) The statement that the Jews21 "are the enemies of the whole human race" resembles general Pagan polemic, scarcely characteristic of Paul; (c) The statement that the Jews "are filling up their sins" and divine "wrath has finally overtaken them" contradicts Rm 11:25-26 that "all Israel will be saved." Arguments for Pauline authorship of 1 Th 2:13-16: (a) All mss. contain it; (b) Paul speaks hostilely of "Jews" as persecutors in 2 Co 11:24, and he is not incapable of polemic hyperbole; (c) In Rm (Rm 2:5; Rm 3:5-6; Rm 4:15; Rm 11:25) Paul speaks of the wrath of God against Jews, so that the hope of their ultimate salvation does not prevent portrayal of divine disfavor. In Paul's thought the jealous Jews at Thessalonica who harassed both him and those who came to believe in Jesus would represent what Rm 11:25 calls the part of Israel upon whom "hardening" (= the "wrath" of 1 Thess) had come. If before Paul arrived, Jews who observed the Law had attracted some God-fearing Gentiles and prominent women (Ac 17:4), understandably they might have been infuriated when their converts went over to Paul's proc lamation of the Messiah in which Law observance was not required.

(3) The description of the parousia given in 1 Th 4:16-17 involves the voice of the archangel, the signal of the heavenly trumpet, and being caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. In 1 Th 5:1-2 there is a vagueness about the times and the seasons. Some of this echoes both the language of Jewish apocalyptic (see p. 776 below) and the language attributed to Jesus in the apocalyptic discourses of the Gospels (see p. 144 above on Mk 13). Did Paul mean any or all of this as a literal description? Whether he did or not, should modern readers (including those who believe in the inspiration of Scripture) expect this to be fulfilled literally? If not, to what extent is the {464} parousia a symbolic way of saying that, in order to bring about the kingdom, God has yet something to do that cannot be done by human beings but only through Jesus Christ? How important to Christians is the expectation of the parousia after two thousand years of waiting for Jesus to return?22 That Jesus Christ will come again (in glory) to judge the living and the dead is part both of the Apostles' Creed and the Nicene Creed. See Issue 2 in Chapter 10 above.

(4) If 4:13 means that some Thessalonian Christians have been grieving over those who are asleep as if there were no hope, is that because they are making the expected encounter with Jesus in the parousia the moment of receiving God's gift of life? In 4:14 Paul speaks of Jesus who "died and rose again"; thus the death and resurrection of Christ is the life-giving moment for all who are "in him" (including the dead: 4:17). What does being caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord add? Some modern Christians think of this as the "rapture" and deem it extremely important; others have scarcely heard of it. See G. Wainwright in The Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1983), 485; R. Jewett, Jesus Against the Rapture (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1979).

(5) At most Paul was at Thessalonica only a couple of months before he had to depart. Yet shortly afterward when he writes I Thess, he urges the Thessalonians to be considerate to those who are over them in the Lord with the task of admonishing them (5:12). What are the possible ways in which such figures could have gained this authoritative position/function? Did Paul appoint leaders before he left a community he had founded, as Ac 14:23 indicates (even if Acts be judged anachronistic in identifying those leaders with the later presbyters)? How are the figures at Thessalonica to be related to the roughly simultaneous overseers/bishops and deacons in place in Philippi (Ph 1:1) and to those whom God would appoint at Corinth as prophets, teachers, and administrators (1 Co 12:28-30)?23

(6) 1Th is the earliest Christian writing to have been preserved; surely Paul was not conscious that he was composing a work that would have that distinction. Nevertheless, the status of 1 Thess offers interesting reflections. Were this the only Christian work that had survived from the 1st century, what would it tell us of the way Paul worked, of his self-understanding, of his christology, of his conception of the church or Christian community? Given that most Christians claim to adhere to the apostolic faith, it is interesting {465} to imagine being transported back to the year 51 and entering the meeting room at Thessalonica where this letter of the apostle Paul was being read for the first time. Within the opening ten verses one would hear references to God the Father, the Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit, and to faith, love, and hope. That is a remarkable testimony to how quickly ideas that became standard in Christianity were already in place.

The Letter to the Galatians

Background

Basic Information

The Aftermath of Galatians in Paul's Career

To Where and When?

The "Faith (pistis) of Christ"

Issues and Problems for Reflection

Background

In some ways this has been considered the most Pauline of the Pauline writings, the one in which anger has caused Paul to say what he really thinks. Only parts of 2Co match it in passion; for with the prophetic fervor of an Amos, Paul discards diplomacy in challenging the Galatians. Not surprisingly, Christian innovators or reformers anxious to get the larger church to do a 180-degree turn have appealed to Gal's vigorous language and imagery. Marcion translated Paul's antinomy between faith and the works of the Law1 into an antinomy between the creator God and the redeemer God.2 Luther called it his "pet epistle," for he found in Paul's rejection of justification by the works of the Law support for his rejection of salvation by good works. Indeed Luther's confrontations with the papal emissaries were seen as a re-enactment of Paul's publicly condemning Cephas (Peter) on behalf of the truth of the gospel. A sermon on Gal brought great peace of heart to John Wesley. In the 19th century the opposition between Peter and Paul described in Gal was a key factor in F. C. Baur's reconstruction of early Christianity. Others, however, have been embarrassed by the crudeness of the polemic and the lack of nuance about the Jewish heritage. In antiquity Gal may well have contributed to a situation that 2 Pt 3:15-16 chose to describe diplomatically, "Our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him... in all his letters; there are some things in them hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable twist to their destruction." One thing is certain: No one can fault the Paul of Gal for making theology dull..

{468}

Basic Information

Date: 54-55 from Ephesus is more likely than 57 from Macedonia (Traditional Chronology; see Table 6 in Chapter 16 above for Revisionist Chronology).

To: Churches around Ancyra in ethnic Galatian territory, i.e., north-central section of the province of Galatia in Asia Minor (evangelized in 50 and 54), or, less likely, to churches at Antioch, Lystra, and Derbe in the south of the province (evangelized in 47-48 and 50).

Authenticity, Unity, and Integrity: Not seriously disputed.

Formal Division:

A. Opening Formula: 1:1-5

B. Thanksgiving: None

C. Body: 1:6-6:10

D. Concluding Formula: 6:11-18.

Division According to Contents (and Rhetorical Analysis): 1:1-10: Introduction:

1:1-5: Opening Formula (already defensive in describing apostleship and what Christ has done)

1:6-10: Exordium or introduction (astonishment in place of Thanksgiving), describing the issue, the adversaries and the seriousness of the case (by anathemas)

1:11-2:14: Paul narrates his preaching career to defend his thesis about his gospel stated in 1:11-12 2:15-21: Debate with opponents, contrasting his gospel with theirs: justified by faith in Christ, not by observing the Law; Christians live by faith

3:1-4:31: Proofs for justification by faith not by Law: six arguments drawn from the past experiences of the Galatians and from Scripture, particularly centered on Abraham

5:1-6:10: Ethical exhortation (paraenesis) for them to preserve their freedom, and walk according to the Spirit

6:11-18: Conclusion: authenticating postscript in Paul's own hand (as distinct from scribe who took dictation); recapitulation of attitude toward circumcision; benediction.

In the years before ad 55 Paul had proclaimed the gospel (perhaps twice3) to Gentiles who now constituted the churches of Galatia. (Their precise identity we shall leave to later.) Although his stay among them was brought about or affected by a "weakness of the flesh" (4:13),4 the Galatians were more than kind during Paul's affliction and treated him as an angel of God. Seemingly they saw him work miracles among them (3:5). This memory sharpens his outrage that the Galatians now (4:16) evaluate him as an enemy who {469} somehow cheated them in his preaching about Christ. How had this come about?

After Paul left Galatia, Christians of Jewish origin (6:13) had come, probably from Jerusalem,5 preaching another gospel (1:7), i.e., an understanding of what God had done in Christ different from Paul's. (Had they come to Galatia because Paul had been there, or was this simply a stop on their evangelizing route that accidentally brought them into contact with his past work? Were they as pointedly hostile to him as he was to them?) Their "gospel" has to be reconstructed mirror-wise6 from Paul's hostile refutation of it - a process marked by uncertainties and not geared to engender a sympathetic understanding of a preaching that most Galatians quickly came to judge more persuasive than what they had heard from Paul.

In subsequent Christian history a sense of the sacredness of NT Scripture and respect for Paul as the great apostle have naturally led Christians to a conviction that his gospel was true to Christ and that of his adversaries was not. Nevertheless, since there is no convincing reason for thinking that "the preachers," as they may be called, were fools or dishonest, I shall seek to show why their gospel, so far as it can be reconstructed, sounded plausible. Paul and the preachers were at one in proclaiming that what God had accomplished through Jesus the Messiah in terms of justification and the gift of the Spirit was for both Jews and Gentiles. But how were Gentiles to receive God's gift in Jesus? According to Paul's preaching, God offered justification through the "faith of/in Christ" (subsection below). According to the preachers faith in Christ had a role, but justification was not complete without observing the works of the Law - a preaching that preserved for the Gentiles the great heritage of Judaism with all its ethical guidance.7 A key factor in that preaching of works was an insistence on circumcision and observing the calendrical feasts (4:10). As the preachers explained, the one true God had blessed all the nations of the world in Abraham who believed (Gn 15:6) and then, as part of the covenant, gave Abraham the commandment of {470} circumcision (Gn 17:10) and the heavenly calendar. Jews are descendants of Abraham through Sarah (the free wife) and have observed the covenant of circumcision (Gn 17:14) and the Law given by angels to Moses (Ga 3:19); Gentiles are descendants of Abraham through Hagar (the slave wife). Through the preachers the work of Jesus the Messiah was now being extended to the Gentiles, who can be fully included in the covenant if they are circumcised in imitation of Abraham and do the works of the Law. (Borgen maintains that without circumcision the Gentile believers in Christ were proselytes, and circumcision was required if they were to remain in the covenanted people of God.).

Yet had not Paul already brought the gospel to the Gentile believers in Galatia? No! In order to make quick converts Paul had preached a truncated gospel that did not tell them that sharing in the Abraham covenant depended on circumcision. Paul had left them without the guidance of the Law, prey to the "Evil Inclination"8 and the desires of the flesh; and that is why sin was still rampant among them. This was a persuasive message, especially if the preachers pointed out that Paul, who was a latecomer to the gospel, had not known Jesus as the real apostles had. After all, Jesus, who was circumcised himself, had never exempted anyone from circumcision; and the real apostles at Jerusalem kept the feasts and the food laws. How could Paul answer the preachers and win back the Galatians to recognize that he had preached the truth? As we turn to analyze the letter he wrote, we should keep in mind that controversy with the preachers shapes his expression and phrasing. Too often Paul's "theology" of justification, faith, and freedom is abstracted from Gal without recognizing the apologetic shaping.9

General Analysis of the Message

In the Opening Formula (1:1-5), unlike I Thess, Paul designates himself as an apostle, a status stemming not from human beings but from Jesus Christ (1:1- and from God: 1:15).10 Of the seven undisputed Pauline letters, {471} if we leave aside Rm which was sent to a community that Paul had not evangelized, Gal is the only one of the remaining six in which Paul does not name a co-sender.11 He addresses himself "to the churches of Galatia," i.e., a group of communities in the Galatian region or in the larger province of Galatia (see subsection below). Paul is the target of the attack in Galatia, and he makes a personal response - one marked by anger that does not allow for a Thanksgiving.

The Body opens with a type of exordium or introduction (1:6-10) that, with a biting tone of disappointed astonishment,12 quickly lays out the issue, the adversaries, and the seriousness of the case: There is no other gospel than the one proclaimed by Paul when he called the Galatians in the grace of Christ; cursed are those who preach something different.13 Then, using the rhetorical pattern of court defenses, Paul writes in letter form an apologia (1:11-2:21), polemical in tone but employing a sequence of rhetorical devices.14 In an implied courtroom setting, the preachers who have come to Galatia are to be imagined as the accusers, Paul as the defendant, and the Galatians as the judge. To appreciate the points made by Paul, one should keep in mind the claims of the preachers as reconstructed in the Background above. Paul's main thesis is that the gospel he proclaims came through divine revelation and not from human beings (1:11-12). As a paradigm15 of that, Paul relates the story of his conversion and preaching, touching down on key points, e.g.: the initial divine revelation and commission; no dependence on the Jerusalem apostles; the challenge to him from the party insisting on {472} circumcision for the Gentiles; the agreement reached between him and the Jerusalem authorities rejecting that challenge; and the acknowledgment that he was entrusted with the gospel and apostolate to the uncircumcised (1:13-2:10).

In describing those of the circumcision party who afterwards came to Antioch from Jerusalem claiming to represent James, Paul is suggesting that they were the progenitors of those who have come to Galatia (from Jerusalem?); for he blends his defense of the gospel at Antioch against the earlier adversaries into a type of dialogue with the Jewish Christian preachers in Galatia (2:11-14 with 2:15-21). To paraphrase, "By birth we are both Jewish and so we know the Law; yet we also know that one cannot be justified by the works of the Law; indeed in seeking Christ we Jews found ourselves to be sinners. And so I died to the Law and was justified by the faith of/in Christ who gave himself for me and now lives in me."16

Then Paul piles up six arguments from experience and Scripture to convince the foolish Galatians who have allowed themselves to be bewitched11 (3:1-4:31) - arguments that I now simplify. First (3:1-5): When he proclaimed Christ crucified, the Galatians received the Spirit without observing the works of the Law, so how can those works be made necessary? Second (3:6-14): Against the preachers' insistence on the circumcision of Abraham (Gn 17:10,14) he can cite God's promise that in Abraham all the nations would be blessed (Gn 12:3) - a promise independent of circumcision - so that in giving the Spirit to the uncircumcised Gentiles through faith, God is fulfilling the promise to Abraham, a man whose faith was reckoned as righteousness (Gn 15:6).18 Third (3:15-25): A will that has been ratified cannot be annulled by a later addition. The Law came 430 years after the promises to Abraham; how can inheritance from those promises depend on observing the Law? The Law was only a temporary custodian until Christ came. Fourth (3:26-4:11): The Galatians, who were slaves to the elemental spirits of the universe, have experienced through redemption by God's Son and divine adoption the freedom of the "sons" (= children) of God; why do they want again to become slaves, this time to the demands of the Law? Fifth (4:12-20): The Galatians treated Paul extremely well, like an angel; how can he have become their enemy, as the preachers would make him? Sixth (4:21-31): The preachers appealed to Abraham, Hagar, and Sarah but drew {473} the wrong lesson.19 Hagar, the slave woman, does not represent the descendance of the Gentiles but the present, earthly Jerusalem and the enslaving covenant of the Law given on Mt Sinai; Sarah, the free woman, represents the heavenly Jerusalem and the covenant of God's promise to Abraham - she is the mother of all who have been made free in Christ.

After the arguments Paul finishes the Body of Gal with a passionate exhortation (5:1-6:10) against the preachers and a warning that the Law will not help the Galatians against the works of the flesh (which are contrasted with the works of the Spirit in 5:19-26).20 A magnificent affirmation in 5:6, "In Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any force, but faith working through love," makes it clear that Paul does not consider circumcision something evil but rather something that has no power to bring justification to the Gentiles. It also suggests that Paul thought of faith accepting the efficacy of what Christ had done as something that had to find expression in love manifested in the life of the believer. (He would see God at work in both the faith and the love, with neither being simply human reactions.) The preachers may speak of "the law of Christ"; that, however, is not the Law of Sinai but the obligation to bear one another's burdens (6:2).

Then, Paul stops the scribe and writes the Conclusion (6:11-18) against circumcision with his own hand in big letters, so that the Galatians cannot miss the point. If the preachers praised the superiority of Israel, Paul proclaims "the Israel of God" in which it makes no difference whether or not one is circumcised. As for the preachers' attacks on him, "From now on let no one make more trouble for me, for I bear the marks of Jesus on my body." What Paul has suffered as an apostle is more important than the marks of his circumcision!

The Aftermath of Galatians in Paul's Career

We can only guess what happened when this letter was read in the churches of Galatia. Some would have been offended by the intemperate language that called them fools (3:1). Was it proper for a Christian apostle {474} to indulge in gutter crudity by wishing that in the circumcision advocated by the preachers the knife might slip and lop off the male organ (5:12)? What entitled Paul to deprecate as "so-called pillars of the church" members of the Twelve who had walked with Jesus and the one honored as "the brother of the Lord" (2:9)? Was that polemic not a sign of the weakness of his position? Others who had turned away from Paul, remembering the one who had brought Christ to them and realizing that beneath the polemic surface of the missive there was tender concern (4:19), might have been led to reexamine whether they had done right in listening to the preachers. In the end did Paul's letter win the day with the majority? It was preserved after all; and 1 Co 16:1 (written later?) tells us that he planned a collection of money from the Galatian churches, presumably with hope of success.

Be that as it may, surely certain elements in the letter did damage to Paul. He had expressed himself intemperately. (Was the scribe bold enough to ask him did he really want to phrase 5:12 the way he did?) The preachers who honestly believed that they were serving Christ by advising the Gentiles of the necessity of circumcision would surely not have forgotten Paul's personal attacks, including one on their integrity and motives (6:12-13).21 If Phil (3:2ff.) was written shortly after Gal, we may be seeing the preachers' continued pursuit of a mission to correct Paul's deficient evangelizing. His remarks about the so-called pillars of the Jerusalem church, his polemic against Peter who was not on the right path about the truth of the gospel (Ga 2:14), and even his unnuanced contention that the Sinai covenant brought about enslavement (4:24-25) most probably got back to the Jerusalem Christian authorities sympathetic to the Jewish heritage. No wonder that Paul's later plans to return to Jerusalem with the collection made him apprehensive about acceptance (Rm 15:22-32; also pp. 554, 564 below). In the 2d century the vigorous anti Law phrasing of Gal would serve Marcion's thesis that the OT should be rejected as the work of an inferior god (demiurge) - a thesis Paul would surely have rejected.

To Where and When?

These two questions are related. In this letter addressed "to the churches of Galatia" (1:2) and the "Galatians" (3:1), Paul mentions that his first preaching of the gospel in that area was because of a bodily ailment (which seemingly interrupted his journey unexpectedly) and that he was well {475} received and treated (4:13-15). Where did the addressees of Gal live? If the meeting in Jerusalem described in Ga 2:1-10 is the same as the meeting in Jerusalem after Paul's "First Missionary Journey" described in Ac 1, as most scholars think, the letter was written after 50 (Traditional Chronology). While writing this angry letter, Paul expresses the wish (obviously unfulfilled) to be present with the Galatians (4:20). Is that merely a rhetorical expression of concern? Or does it mean he is somehow unable to come? Because he is too far away? Because he is in prison? Or because he is too involved in another church situation, e.g., the negotiations with Corinth? Do any of these suggestions help to specify when Paul wrote? Let us look in greater detail at the intertwined issues.

Galatai were Indo-Aryans, related to the Celts and Gauls, who invaded Asia Minor about 279 bc. Within fifty years, after defeat by the kingdom of Pergamum, their territory was restricted to a mountainous central section around Ancyra (modern Ankara). Rome used them as allies in various wars; and when the last Galatian king died in 25 bc, their ethnic homeland was incorporated into the large Roman "Province of Galatia" that extended south toward the Mediterranean, including Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe.22 Were Christians in those cities in the southern part of the province of Galatia addressed in Gal (the South Galatian theory)? Or were the ethnic Galatians in the north central region the ones addressed (the North Galatian theory)? The issue, strongly disputed among scholars for the last 250 years, is not really important for the meaning of Gal; and so the discussion will be kept brief. Although much of the deliberation centers on a comparison between Gal and Acts, readers should remember that the Acts information may be jumbled and surely is incomplete, not listing all of Paul's travels.

South Galatian Theory (proposed in the last two centuries and defended by such scholars as W. M. Ramsay and F. F. Bruce). There is clear evidence in Acts that Paul had evangelized the southern part of the province of Galatia, specifically Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe (during the "First Missionary Journey" in 46-49 and then again briefly on the "Second Journey" in 50). That evidence, however, leaves little room for Paul's sickness being the occasion of his first visit there. Moreover, Acts never clearly refers to the southern region as Galatia. Indeed, Acts places the southern cities in their districts, not the province: Antioch in Pisidia (13:14), Lystra and Derbe in Lycaonia (14:6). Acts specifies that Paul's mission in the southern cities reached Jews as well as Gentiles, but there is no indication in Gal that any of the addressees are converted Jews. Arguments for the Southern {476} theory include Paul's habit of usually (but not always) employing the names of Roman provinces (e.g., Macedonia and Achaia), and the reference to Barnabas in Ga 2:1 as if he were known to the addressees - he was with Paul on the "First Missionary Journey" but not afterward. Yet was Barnabas' name known only to those Christians whom he had personally evangelized? Would not his presence at the famous Jerusalem meeting have been more widely known?

North Galatian Theory (the ancient approach and still the majority theory). While the term "Galatia" might be ambiguous, the address "Galatians" in 3:1 is much less so. It is more appropriate for people who were ethnically of that descent than for the hellenized city populace to the south. When would Paul have come to the ethnic Galatian region? On the "Second Missionary Journey," after Paul revisited the south of the province (ca. 50), Ac 16:6-7 reports, "They (Paul, Silas, Timothy) went through Phrygia and the Galatian region, having been hindered by the Holy Spirit from speaking the word in (the province of) Asia. Having come opposite (toward) Mysia, they tried to go into Bithynia, but the Spirit of Jesus did not permit them." Does Acts mean that they moved westward through the Phrygian region of the province of Galatia (thus still not into North Galatia), or does it mean they moved northward through Phrygia into the (North) Galatian territory proper? The former might seem more logical geographically; but if one accepts the latter interpretation, the mysterious comment about being "hindered by the Holy Spirit" might be related to Paul's being ill in Galatia (Ga 4:13) and thus hampered in his missionary enterprise. Whatever Acts meant by "Phrygia and the Galatian region," Paul made converts there, for according to 18:23, early on the "Third Missionary Journey" (ad 54), Paul traveled from place to place through the Galatian region and Phrygia "strengthening all the disciples there," i.e., by implication, disciples made on the earlier journey.23 (The reversal of the order of the two geographical names shows how hard it is to get precision from Acts, whose author may not have known exactly where Paul went.) While it is not easy to judge, overall the arguments supporting this Northern theory seem more persuasive.

Dating. In the South Galatian theory, Paul could have written Gal anytime after revisiting the southern cities in 50 ("Second Missionary Journey").24 What dating is suggested by the more accepted North Galatian {477} theory? There are two proposals: (1) After passing through the (ethnic) Gala-tian and Phrygian region a second time, Paul went to Ephesus (Ac 19:1) where he stayed three years (54-56). Word could have reached him that teachers had come and "quickly" (Ga 1:6) won over the Galatians to "another gospel" - news that prompted the angry writing of Gal in 54 or 55.25 If the letter was successful (or, at least, if Paul hoped it was successful) an attempt at healing could be signaled by Paul's plan in 1 Co 16:1, when he was about to leave Ephesus in 57, to have the Galatian churches contribute to his collection for Jerusalem. (2) Some scholars who think there could have been no healing after such a letter as Gal argue that the plan in 1 Co 16:1 was formulated before Paul found out what had happened to his converts in Galatia. He was informed of that as he left Ephesus or just afterward; and abandoning the plan for a collection in Galatia,26 he wrote Gal from Macedonia in late 57 (between 2Co and Rom) as a harsh reproof. The closeness of Gal to Rm (written from Corinth in 58) is also advanced as an argument for this later dating. The dating in the mid-50s has more following, and I judge it more probable; but the evidence leaves the question open.

The "Faith (pistis) of Christ" (Ga 2:16, etc.)

A major discussion has centered on what Paul means when he speaks of being justified or of justification (see the subsection in Chapter 24 below), not from the works of the Law but from/through the faith of (Jesus) Christ (Ga 2:16; Ga 3:22; also Rm 3:22,26; Ph 3:9). The construction "from/through faith of Christ" (ek/dia pisteos Christou) can be understood as an objective genitive, i.e., the Christian's faith in Christ, or as a subjective genitive, i.e., the faith possessed or manifested by Christ.27 The debate also affects the {478} simpler and more common expression "from faith" (ek pisteos).2 S Both interpretations require comment.

Faith in Christ is probably the more common interpretation and may be supported by Ga 3:26 which uses the preposition "in." In that interpretation, however, although faith in what God has done in Christ, especially through the crucifixion and resurrection, can be seen as a response that brings about justification, one needs to emphasize that God also generates the response - a divine grace given to believe, responding to the divine grace manifested in Christ. The faith of Christ is sometimes understood as his fidelity to God's plan, a fidelity that brought about justification. Others find that interpretation weak and prefer to think of the faith manifested by Jesus in going to crucifixion without visible divine support, a portrayal that may be justified by the passion narratives of Mark and Mt and by Heb 5:8. Martyn contends that Ga 2:20-21 shows that Christ's faith is Christ's faithful death. Still others combine the two approaches and suggest that Christ's faith manifested in his death is given to his followers through faith in Christ.29 To survey the discussion among scholars3030 and to ask what all this means for understanding Paul is a basic exercise in the study of Pauline theology.

Issues and Problems for Reflection

(1) There is a considerable literature on the opponents of Paul in Galatia,31 involving different proposals for identifying them. Since the early 20th century a few scholars have argued that simultaneously Paul was struggling against two groups: Judaizing Christians from Jerusalem who insisted the Gentiles should be circumcised and (either Jewish or Gentile) libertine proponents of the Spirit who claimed that believers could gratify the desires of the flesh.32 It would have been to the second group that Paul directed 5:16-26. Another proposal is that the preachers did not come from the outside but from inside the Galatian community, e.g., Jewish Christians challenging uncircumcised Gentile members of the community. Still another proposal (Schmithals, Paul 13-64) is that the preachers were gnostics who advocated circumcision as a mystical rite that would bring the Galatians to a higher {479} state of perfection, with or without the Law (6:13). In the majority judgment these proposals introduce unnecessary complications and bypass the dominant evidence that one group of Jewish Christian preachers came to Galatia, demanding circumcision of Gentiles who became followers of Christ.

(2) We saw on pp. 469, 472 above that Paul and the preachers disagreed about the interpretation of the Abraham/Sarah/Hagar story, depending on how they combined the motifs of Gn 1, 15, and 17 (God's promise that in Abraham the Gentiles would be blessed; the faith of Abraham that was cred ited as righteousness; and the covenant of circumcision). Now both Paul and the preachers employed a style of OT interpretation quite different from much of modern exegesis, often because their exegesis, although quite at home in the Judaism of the time, was very free and more-than-literal by our standards (see Chapter 2 above, subsection D). Granted the difference between ancient and modern exegesis, it is worth exploring this question: Which would be the more convincing to modern readers drawing on the literal meaning of the OT, Paul's or the preachers' application of the Abra ham story to the issue of whether Gentile believers in Christ should be cir cumcised if they wished fully to be justified as children of Abraham?

(3) Occasionally, again according to modern standards, there is a problem with Paul's use of the OT because of the textual reading that underlies his interpretation. A famous example is worth considering, namely the reference to faith in Hab 2:3-4, an obscure passage that appears with remarkable di versity in the Hebrew OT, the Greek OT, the DSS, the Letter to the Hebrews, and in Paul's citations in Gal and Rm (a) According to the Masoretic He brew text, the prophet, complaining about injustice against the background of the Neo-Babylonian (Chaldean) conquests ca. 600 bc, is told to await a vision that will surely come even if it delays. In contrast to the inflated arro gant person who is not upright, "the just because of his faith/fidelity shall live," i.e., presumably because of his fidelity to or trust in the God of the covenant, (b) The LXX translation of Hab, although it speaks of a vision, says even if he delays, wait for him, for he will surely come; thus it under stands the vision to be of one who comes, perhaps the king of the Chaldeans as God's instrument. God will be displeased if the one in the vision draws back, but "the just/righteous from my fidelity shall live," i.e., God's fidelity to promises made, (c) In the DSS commentary on Hab (l QpHab 7:5-8:3) the vision is explained by the Righteous Teacher, and it applies to the com munity of those who keep the Law. They will be freed from persecution "because of their deeds and because of their fidelity to the Righteous Teacher," i.e., because of their observing his interpretation of the Law. (d) The author of Heb 10:37-39 follows the LXX with some changes, seem ingly interpreting the coming one in the vision to be Jesus in his second {480} coming. "My just one from faith shall live," i.e., by being faithful until Jesus comes, (e) In Ga 3:11 (Rm 1:17) Paul writes, "The just/righteous from (= through) faith will live," interpreting Hab 2:3-4 to mean that the just live by faith in or fidelity to Jesus Christ.

(4) The preceding paragraph suggests that some of Paul's arguments for his position on faith and Law might not in themselves be very convincing. Although he offers them, we would be mistaken to think that he derived his position from those arguments. His position is an expression of the gospel that did not come to him from human teachers but through a revelation (apo- kalypsis, unveiling) of Jesus Christ (1:12).33 That revelation gave Paul a new perspective whereby he could see how God transformed the world through the crucifixion of Christ, and in 3:23,25 he gives an example of how his view changed. Thus, although he has shaped some of the vocabulary and reason ing of Gal in light of the propaganda of the preachers, much of what he affirms about Christ, faith, and freedom could have been said even if the preachers had never arrived. Drawing together the positive message of Gal, independent of his polemics, is very helpful in understanding Paul. Note in particular the famous christological affirmation of 4:4-7.

(5) Gal contrasts the Law (32 times) and freedom (11 times with cog nates). One of the attractions of the preachers' message may have been the clear ethical directives contained in the Law. Freedom is attractive but needs definition, as we see when we list freedom from sin, freedom from the Law, freedom from obligation and control, freedom for doing what one wishes, freedom for love and service. Freedom can leave the door open to license, as seemingly it had done in Galatia. Paul counterattacks by criticizing a mis understanding of freedom (5:13) and by warning those who walk by the Spirit not to be involved in "works of the flesh" that he lists (5:17-21). Ironi cally his very words have become a type of law guiding Christians on these points. In pastoral practice what is the interplay between responsible free dom and clear directives that border on law?

(6) In an apocalyptic mind-set such as Paul's, there is little time for chang ing this world's social structures. Consequently the famous denial of differ ence between Jew and Greek, slave and free, male and female (Ga 3:28) is not primarily a statement of social or political equality. It is a statement of equality through Christ in God's plan of salvation: "You are all one in Christ Jesus." The same Paul who phrased it was capable of sanctioning inequali ties among Christians: The Gentiles are but a wild olive branch grafted onto the cultivated tree of Israel; those who were slaves when called to Christ {481} should stay in that state; women should not be permitted to speak in the churches and should be subordinate (Rm 11:24; 1 Co 7:20-21; 1 Co 14:34). Nevertheless, many Christians recognize a gospel dynamism in Paul's statement that may or even should go beyond his vision. How is that effected theologically without unjustifiably making 3:28 an anticipation of the French Revolution ideal of egalitel

(7) Marcion's NT canon was heavily Pauline: Luke and ten Pauline letters (beginning with Gal!). His rejection of the Old Testament and the whole heritage from Judaism is generally looked on as an extreme derivative from Paulinism. Martyn, TBOB 2:283, quotes a memorable sentence from F. Overbeck, "Paul had only one student who understood him, Marcion - and this student misunderstood him." On the other hand, the Jewish Christians of the 2d century came to hate Paul as one who had distorted the Jewish heritage and hindered the success of the gospel among Jews. Going through Gal to find statements about the Law that might feed Marcion's absolutism and later Jewish Christian antagonism allows one to see how Scripture can be read in a way never dreamed of by the author.

The Letter to the Philippians

The Background

General Analysis of the Message

The Christological Hymn of 2:5-11

From Where and When?

Unity: One Letter or Two or Three?

Issues and Problems for Reflection

In some ways this is the most attractive Pauline letter, reflecting more patently than any other the warm affection of the apostle for his brothers and sisters in Christ. Indeed, Phil has been classified an example of the rhetoric of friendship. It contains one of the best-known and loved NT descriptions of the graciousness of Christ: one who emptied himself and took on the form of a servant, even unto death on a cross. Nevertheless, Phil is plagued by much-debated difficulties. We cannot be certain where Paul was when he wrote it and hence the date of its composition. Moreover, we are uncertain of its unity, for some would divide the present document into two or three originally distinct letters. But let us discuss the letter as it now stands before turning to such debates. After the Background and the General Analysis of Phil, subsections will be devoted to: Hymns and the Christological hymn of 2:5-11, From where and when, Unity, Issues for reflection, and Bibliography.

The Background

As we recalled on p. 456 above, Paul had crossed over by sea with Silas and Timothy from the Province of Asia (Asia Minor or present-day Turkey) to Macedonia (Europe, present-day northern Greece) in ad 50-51. Passing the mountainous island of Samothrace, they landed at the port of Neapolis, where the great Roman highway across Macedonia, the Via Egnatia, had an access coming down to the sea. It is dubious that such a long highway was always well maintained in these early imperial times, so that Philippi, astride the Egnatia some ten miles inland, depended heavily on commerce coming up the short access road from the Mediterranean. This site, to which the missionaries immediately went, was a major Roman city, where a century before (42 bc) Mark Antony and Octavian (Augustus) had defeated Brutus and Cassius, the assassins of Julius Caesar, and had settled the veterans from the victorious armies.1 Here Paul proclaimed the gospel and founded his {484}

Summary of Basic Information

Date: Ca. 56 if from Ephesus. (Or 61-63 from Rome, or 58-60 from Caesarea.) To: The Christians at Philippi, a Roman colony (Ac 17:12) where army veterans were allotted property after battles in the civil wars (42 bc), and like Thessalonica (farther west) an important commercial city on the Via Egnatia. Evangelized by Paul ca. ad 50 on his "Second Missionary Journey" (see Table 6 in Chapter 16 above for Revisionist Chronology).

Authenticity: Not seriously disputed.

Unity: Scholarship about evenly divided: That two or three letters have been combined to make up Philippians is widely suggested, but a respectable case can be made for unity.

Integrity: Today no major theory of interpolations. In the past, proposed interpolations for theological reasons: "bishops and deacons" (1:1), or the christological hymn (2:6-11).

Formal Division (of existing, unified letter):

A. Opening Formula: 1:1-2

B. Thanksgiving: 1:3-11

C. Body: 1:12-4:20: Mixture of Paul's prison situation; exhortations, warning against false teachers, gratitude to the Philippians

D. Concluding Formula: 4:21-23. Division According to Contents:

1:1-11: Address/greeting and Thanksgiving

1:12-26: Paul's situation in prison and attitude toward death

1:27-2:16: Exhortation based on example of Christ (christological hymn)

2:17-3:la: Paul's interest in the Philippians and planned missions to them

3:lb-4:l: Warning against false teachers; Paul's own behavior (a separate letter?)

4:2-9: Exhortation to Euodia and Syntyche: unity, joy, higher things

4:10-20: Paul's situation and the Philippians' generous gifts

4:21-23: Concluding greeting, blessing.

first church in Europe (Ac 16:11-15; Ph 4:15). A tribute to his planting is paid almost a century later by Polycarp, who (Philippians 1:2) speaks of the firmly rooted faith of the Philippians, famous in years past and still flourishing.

Reading Ac 16 one gets the impression of a relatively brief stay and some success among Jews and Gentiles, despite civic harassment. At the beginning (16:13-15) by a stream outside the city gate, Lydia, a merchant woman from Thyatira who sold purple goods and who was attracted to Judaism {485} ("a worshiper of God"), was baptized with her household and offered her house for Paul to stay.2 This story seems to reflect accurately social realities in Philippi, and especially the prominent position played by women. Some confirmation may be supplied in Ph 4:2 by Paul's mentioning two women, Euodia and Syntyche, who are now bickering but who had been his evangelistic co-workers there. Their names and those of Epaphroditus and Clement in Ph 2:25; Ph 4:3 suggest that there was a high percentage of Gentiles among the Philippian Christians.

More conversions at Philippi are recorded in Ac 16:16-40. The fact that Paul had driven out the spirit from a fortune-telling slave girl caused the owners to haul him and Silas before the local magistrates as troublesome Jews. No wonder that Paul described his time at Philippi as one "when we suffered and were shamefully treated" (1 Th 2:2). Yet, although they had been stripped, beaten, and imprisoned, when an earthquake jarred open the prison doors, Paul and Silas refused to escape - a gesture that led to the conversion of the jailer and his household. Eventually the magistrates apologized for mishandling Roman citizens but asked them to depart, and so they set out west along the Via Egnatia for Thessalonica.3 With that background, let us look at this letter to "all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with bishops and deacons" (Ph 1:1).

General Analysis of the Message

Although my treatment of most of the Pauline letters moves sequentially, following the traditional letter format,4 here as with I Thess, because Paul's thought shifts back and forth, I suggest that readers go through the letter quickly to get a surface impression of the contents, and then turn to this Analysis that highlights the main issues.

Those converted at Philippi by Paul entered into a unique partnership with {486} him (1:5) that lasted from the moment he left for Thessalonica (to which they sent gifts several times: Ph 4:15-16; see also 2 Co 11:9) until this very moment when he was writing from prison.5 Their sending Epaphroditus to Paul has been a new attestation of this fidelity; and now, because of concern over that valuable co-worker's health, Paul has sent him back (Ph 4:18; Ph 2:25-26). A strong bond of friendship colors this letter that expresses Paul's gratitude and keeps the Philippians informed; indeed the human attraction of Paul the man is revealed in their loyalty. One cannot dismiss simply as letter-form his emotional words to the Philippians, written in a context that had brought him face to face with the possibility of his own death: "I hold you in my heart" (Ph 1:7); "With God as my witness, I yearn for all of you with the affection of Christ Jesus" (1:8); "My beloved and longed-for brothers (and sisters), my joy and my crown" (4:1). Besides the strong attestation of gratitude and friendship, which may be considered the main motivation for the letter, there are important indications about Paul's outlook from prison and the situation at Philippi that need to be considered.

Paul's Outlook from Prison: The letter reflects thoughts forced on Paul by his imprisonment for preaching the gospel. First, he is not despondent despite what he is suffering. His imprisonment, although made difficult by the legal charge and the guards, advances the gospel since clearly he is suffering for Christ (Ph 1:12-13; Ph 3:8); and others have been emboldened by his example to preach without fear (Ph 1:14). Unfortunately some are doing that in a spirit of rivalry in order to outdo Paul (Ph 1:15),6 and he shows contempt for such competitiveness both in Ph 1:18 and in the roughly contemporaneous 1 Co 1:13; 1 Co 3:5-9. The preachers do not matter; the only thing that matters is that Christ be preached.

Second, reflection on death is brought on by Paul's current situation, as witnessed both in Phil and the Corinthian correspondence. (It contributes to discussions on pp. 437-38 above by making us wonder to what extent Paul's theology on basic issues developed in the course of time.) Earlier, in 1 Th 4:17, Paul used the language of: "We who are alive" at the coming of Christ. If that is not just an editorial "we," Paul expected to survive till the parousia. But in Ph 1:20-26 he wrestles with the possibility of dying {487} (also 2 Co 5:1-10), trying to decide whether the immediate access to Christ provided by death is better than the continued ministry of proclaiming Christ. In Ph 3:10-11 Paul speaks of sharing Christ's suffering "that somehow I may attain the resurrection from the dead" - is he contemplating martyrdom?7

The Situation at Philippi: Paul wants the Philippian Christians to be blameless, shining as lights amid a crooked and perverse generation and holding fast to the word of life, so that he will know that he has not run in vain (Ph 2:14-16). Paul wishes to hear that they stand firm in one spirit, striving with one mind for the faith of the gospel - a koinonia of the Spirit (Ph 1:27; Ph 2:1). Yet there are some who are troubling the Philippian church. How many groups does Paul have in mind?8 At least three distinct attitudes are reprimanded in the text.

First, there is internal dissension at Philippi even among those, like Euodia and Syntyche, who had labored side by side with Paul (Ph 4:2-3).9 The cause of the dissension is not clear, but given human nature it probably reflected conceit and a lack of humility which Paul condemns (see Ph 2:2-4). Indeed, it is against conceit and pushing one's own interest that Paul holds up Christ as an example of self-giving service in the christological hymn of 2:5-11 (subsection below).

Second, apart from the squabbling adherents who had worked with Paul, there is an external opposition to the Philippian Christians that causes them to suffer (1:28-29). Seemingly this continues the type of harassment to which Paul himself was subjected when he first came there and which he has also encountered at Ephesus (1:30; Ac 19:23-20:1), namely, people complaining about the strange teaching of the Christians because it does not acknowledge the gods, and appealing to the local authorities to arrest or expel them. Nothing can be done about such injustice, but God will overcome.

Third, there are the workers of evil (3:2-3) whom Paul calls dogs,10 and whom the Philippians should look out for. They mutilate the flesh, seemingly {488} by circumcision; and believers in Jesus who worship in the spirit should put no faith in such emphasis on the flesh. Paul can refute these adversaries by describing his own impeccable Jewish credentials - even though he counts all that as loss when compared to the supreme gain of knowing Christ Jesus the Lord (3:4-11). We are not far here from Paul's attack in the roughly contemporaneous Gal on those who insisted on circumcision, namely, Christian Jews. Some think that the Phil passage is a general warning in case such people show up; for, if they were already at work in Philippi, Paul would have devoted more of the letter to them. Or else they may be just beginning to appear in small numbers at Philippi, whereas in Galatia they were having great success.11

What complicates the further diagnosis of this third group of adversaries is the tendency of scholars to interpret other parts of chap. 3 as referring to them. Before we enter into details, readers need to be cautioned about such a use of chap. 3 to reconstruct a historical situation,12 since it shows a certain thematic parallelism to the christological message of chap. 2. (That parallelism also creates doubt that chap. 3 was originally a separate letter, as many scholars maintain; see below.) Just as Paul asked the Philippians to have the mind of Christ (2:5), he can say to them, "Join in imitating me" (3:17). Similar to Christ who was in the image of God and yet emptied himself and took on the form of a servant, Paul, who once had confidence in his fleshly origins as a circumcised Israelite and blameless Pharisee, counted all that as rubbish for the sake of Christ (3:4-9). And just as Christ was elevated, so also Paul, who emphasizes that he is not already perfect, presses upward to God in Christ Jesus (3:12-14). If one accepts such parallelism, how much can be diagnosed from chap. 3 about adversaries?

Is Paul's acknowledgment of imperfection sufficient warrant for theorizing that the adversaries had gnostic leanings, claiming to be perfect and professing a radically realized eschatology in which Christ had already come?13 In 3:18-19 Paul reiterates a warning given in times past about those who live as enemies of the cross of Christ, making the belly their god, glorying in their shame, and setting their mind on earthly things (implicitly unlike {489} Christ, who has been exalted to heavenly things: 2:9-11). Are those people the same as the Judaizing workers of evil of 3:2-3, now described as stressing Mosaic food laws and glorying in the circumcised male organ?14 (Yet the warning in 3:2-3 seems to be against a new, not a past danger.) Or is this a more general condemnation of libertines based on the inevitabilities of unfettered human desires - a common and not necessarily specific charge? Or even a condemnation of libertines in Ephesus from where he is writing and where he struggled with "wild beasts" (1 Co 15:32). Our inability to answer those questions about 3:12 and 3:18-19 cautions against complicating the clearer condemnation in 3:2-3 of adversaries who would try to put emphasis on circumcision and confuse the Philippians. However, since most of what Paul says about himself and his outlook in chap. 3 would have its value no matter who and how distinct the adversaries were, and the description of those adversaries affects relatively few verses, a decision about them is not essential to reading Phil intelligently.

The Christological Hymn of 2:5-11

Hymns in NT Letters. Although there are references to Christians singing "psalms and hymns and spiritual songs,"15 the NT does not contain a collected book of hymns similar to the OT Book of Psalms, the DSS Ho-dayot (1 QH), or the (Pharisees') Psalms of Solomon. Rather lst-century Christian canticles and hymns are incorporated into larger writings of another genre, e.g., a gospel, letter, apocalyptic vision. (Compare 1 Mc 4:30-33; 2 Mc 1:24-29.) Sometimes the NT hymn or song is clearly designated, as in the heavenly singing of Rv 4:8, 10-11; Rv 5:9. The canticles of the Lucan infancy narratives, while not designated as songs, are set off from the surrounding text as oracles or praise (p. 232 above). The Johannine Prologue by its very situation at the beginning of the Gospel stands apart.

A greater problem is presented by the proposal that there are hymns woven into the heart of letters and detectable only by scholarly investigation. Most often nothing in the context states that a hymn is being introduced and quoted, although occasionally the transition to the incorporated hymn {490} is awkward. Among the criteria for detecting a hymn the following have been suggested:16

(a) Worship milieu, e.g., a proposed baptismal setting for Ep 5:14; and the hymns of 1 Peter.

(b) Introductory formulae, e.g., "It is said" in Ep 5:14; "We confess" in 1 Tm 3:16; or in the case of christological hymns, a clause introduced by a relative pronoun, "The one who..." (Ph 2:6; Col 1:15; 1 Tm 4:16), ex tended by causal connectives.

(c) Rhythmic style, parallel patterns, lines or strophes of equal length, e.g., the series of six aorist passive verbs in 1 Tm 3:16; the parallel descriptions of God's Son in Col 1:15-16 and 1:18b-19. This is not rhyming poetry; indeed some would argue for prose hymns.

(d) Vocabulary different from that customarily used by the epistolary au thor - only applicable if the author did not compose the hymn. Similarly a distinctive syntax is often found, e.g., avoiding conjunctions (thus, para taxis).

(e) Not a criterion but often characteristic of the hymns is a high christol- ogy, e.g., the description of the Word as God in Jn 1:1; or of the Son as the one in, for, and through whom all things were created (Col 1:16); or of Christ Jesus as one given the name above every other name (Ph 2:9). Among the themes prominent in the christology are creation, the struggle against evil leading to restoration, and Jesus' death leading to resurrection (exaltation, enthronement). Ps 110:1 , "The Lord said to my Lord, 'Sit at my right hand,'" is a motif in a number of hymns (Rm 8:34; Ep 1:20-22; 1 Pt 3:22), probably on the principle that OT psalms could be seen as ad dressed to Christ (Heb 1:5,8,13). Some of the hymns addressed to Christ are similar to hymns to God.17 Col 3:16 relates psalms and hymns to teaching the word of Christ, and so they became early vehicles of a christological gospel. Hengel ("Hymns" 192) claims, "The hymn to Christ... is as old as the community itself."

(f) Another characteristic is the free redactional addition of explanatory clauses or phrases to traditional hymns to apply them more directly to the author's theme (see n. 20 and 21 below; also n. 9 in Chapter 27).

The criteria are not easy to apply, and as a result the detection of hymns is an inexact "science." That will be illustrated in debates to be reported {491} about the individual hymns - debates as to where they end or how they are to be divided or which lines are original. Moreover, the line of demarcation between hymns and confessional formulae (e.g.,1 Co 15:3-8) or doxologies (e.g.,1 Tm 6:15-16) is not clear. The following is a list of hymns often detected by scholars in NT letters (scholarly estimates run from five to thirty); it does not claim to be complete, and those marked with an asterisk would be the most agreed on:

Ph 2:6-11* Col 1:15-20* Heb 1:3

1 Co 13 Ep 1:3-14* 1 Pt 1:3-5

Rm 3:24-26 Ep 1:20-231 Pt 1:18-21

Rm 6:1-11 Ep 2:14-18(22)1 Pt 2:21-25

Rm 8:31-39 Ep 5:14* 1 Pt 3:18-22

Rm 11:33-36 Tt 3:4-7 1Tm 3:16* 2 Tm 2:11-13*

Various backgrounds have been suggested for the formation of such hymns. Among the suggested Pagan parallels are the Orphic Hymns (5th-4th centuries bc), the Isis Hymn of Cyme (2d century bc),18 and the Mithras Liturgy (pp. 87-88 above). Jewish background is supplied by the personified Wisdom poems of the OT (e.g., Pr 1:20-33; 8-9; Sirach 24; Ws 7:22ff.; Baruch 3:9ff.) where before the creation of the world Wisdom is created by or proceeds from God, then comes down to dwell among human beings, and offers them the food and drink of the knowledge of God. This portrait of Wisdom was a major element in shaping NT christology (BINTC 205-10).

The Christological Hymn of 2:5-11. This description of Christ as a servant to be imitated is the most famous passage in Phil (and indeed among the most memorable hnes ever penned by the apostle). There is an enormous literature devoted to it,19 and a detailed consideration lies beyond the possibilities of this introductory book. Yet these points are worth mentioning by way of acquainting readers with the issues:

Ĝ Most think that Paul wrote but did not create these lines; they are probably a prePauline hymn that the Philippians knew and that Paul may have taught them at the time of his first visit.

Ĝ The structure of the hymn is debated, e.g., six strophes of {492} three lines each (E. Lohmeyer),20 or three strophes of four lines each (J. Jeremias).21 In its theological flow, the hymn is bipartite, with the theme of lowliness/abasement in 2:6-8 and that of exaltation in 2:9-11.

Ĝ Proposals about the background of the hymn (exclusive or in combination) include: gnostic reflections on the Primal Man; the Poimandres tractate in the Hermetic literature (p. 85 above); the Genesis story of Adam and speculations about a second Adam; the Suffering Servant imagery in deuterolsaiah;22 the personified figure of divine Wisdom in postexilic Judaism. A relation to the OT is clear; other proposed references are not.

Ĝ Also debated is whether the hymn was originally composed in Greek, probably with its origin in the mission that evangelized Greek-speaking Jews, or in Aramaic with its origin in the Palestinian missionary enterprise. A plausible case can be made for the latter and for the possibility that Paul learned the hymn in the late 30s in the first years after his conversion.23

Ĝ Dispute about the precise focus of the christology is centered on 2:6-7: Christ Jesus "who being in the form (morphe) of God, did not think being equal to God a harpagmon (something to be clung to or grasped at), but emptied him self having taken the form of a servant, having become (or been born) in a human form." Is "being in the form of God" the same as being equal to God and thus being uncreated (as in the Johannine Prologue: "The Word was God"), or does it mean being in the image/likeness of God (as in Gn 1:27: "God created Adam in His image") and thus lower than being equal to God? Correspondingly, was Christ Jesus already equal to God but did not cling to that, or was he offered the possibility to become equal to God and did not grasp at it (as did Adam when tempted by the serpent in Gn 3:5: "You will be like gods")? Is the movement in the hymn from Christ's being first in the form of God (i.e., equal to God) to subsequently becoming human and thus taking on the form of a servant? Or does the hymn start with Christ's simulta neously being both in the form (image) of God (which is not the same as equal to God) and human in the form of a servant, and does the movement consist in accepting the form of a servant rather than grasping at becoming equal to God? In other words does the hymn posit an incarnation of a divine figure as does the Johannine Prologue, or is there a play on two Adam-figures (i.e., human archetypal models): the Adam of Gn who was in the image of God but, by ambitiously trying to go higher, went lower through his sin; and Christ {493} who was in the image of God but, by humbly choosing to go lower, ultimately was exalted by being given the divine name (2:9-11)?24 If the hymn is incarna-tional and was phrased in Aramaic in the 30s, the highest type of NT christol-ogy was articulated early indeed.

Although in itself the hymn is christological, the paraenetic context is soteriological,25 i.e., it exhorts the addressees for their own salvation to follow the exalted Christ. Rather than looking out for their own interests and seeking to better themselves (2:3-4), the Philippians are to have the mind of a Christ who showed that the way to God is not by grasping at a higher place on the ladder ("upward mobility") but by becoming humbly obedient to God, even unto death on a cross.

From Where and When?

We glean from Phil itself the following items indicative of Paul's situation when he wrote the letter:

(a*) He was in prison (1:7,13,17).

(b) Where he was imprisoned there were members of the praetorian guard (1:13), as well as Christians among "Caesar's household" (4:22).27

(c) Paul mentions the possibility that he might die (Ph 1:19-21; Ph 2:17): Imminently as condemnation culminating his imprisonment? Or as a missionary's always-possible fate?

(d) Yet he also hopes to be delivered (Ph 1:24-25; Ph 2:25). (e*) Timothy was with Paul (Ph 1:1; Ph 2:19-23).

(f) Christians with different motives in this area, some envious of Paul, have been emboldened to speak the word of God (1:14-18).

(g) There have been frequent contacts between Paul and Philippi through messengers back and forth:

1. News reached the Philippians of Paul's imprisonment; {494}

2.They sent Epaphroditus with a gift (4:15);28 but staying with Paul, he became ill, even to the point of death (2:26,30);

3.News reached the Philippians of Epaphroditus' illness;

4.Epaphroditus heard that this news distressed the Philippians;

5.Paul had sent or is now sending Epaphroditus back to Philippi (2:25-30);

6.Paul hopes to send Timothy soon (2:19-23), and indeed to come himself (2:24).

What sites in Paul's known career would fit these details?

Caesarea (58-60) - first proposed in 1799. After Paul was arrested in Jerusalem, Ac 23:33-26:32 describes how Paul was taken to Caesarea to be tried before Felix, then imprisoned, and left there for two years until the new procurator, Festus, examined him and sent him to Rome. Details a, b, c, d above could fit this situation, particularly ca. 60, when Felix arrived and gave Paul hope for release. As for e, Timothy set out for Jerusalem with Paul and went as far as Troas (20:4-5), but we never hear of him again in Acts. Are we to think that he went on to Jerusalem and Caesarea and remained with Paul for the two years? And, in terms of f, did Paul's imprisonment spark rival evangelistic activity among the Christians of Caesarea of whom we heard earlier in Ac 21:8-14, even though all of them seemed favorable to Paul? The greatest difficulty concerns g. Philippi is some 900-1,000 miles from Caesarea by the sea route (which would not always be feasible) and well over 1,000 miles by the very difficult land route. Are all those journeys back and forth from Caesarea to Philippi plausible?29

Rome (61-63).30 Ac 28:16,30 reports that Paul, having been brought to Rome, remained under a type of house arrest (by himself, with a soldier to guard him) for two years at his own expense, and was allowed to preach unhindered.31 As with Caesarea, details a, b, c, d could fit Rome; indeed b {495} could fit Rome better. As for e, there is no evidence in Acts that Timothy was with Paul in Rome in 61-63, and the time distance from the last mention of him (at Troas) is greater; but /is more easily fulfilled in Rome, since in Acts Paul's own preaching is mentioned and we know from Rm 14 and 16:17-18 that Christians there were of different views.32 Again the greatest difficulty concerns g. From Rome to Philippi the land route southeast along the Via Appia to Brundisium, across the Adriatic Sea by ship to Macedonia, and along the Via Egnatia to Philippi would be somewhat more than 700 miles; and a sea voyage along the west coast of Italy, across the Adriatic, with disembarkation and reembarkation at the Corinthian isthmus, and up the east coast of Greece (a route that might have been followed if the emissaries wanted to visit the Pauline church at Corinth) would be over 900 miles. Although the distances are shorter than those in the Caesarea hypothesis, they are still a formidable obstacle to the frequency of the journeys necessary to explain the evidence of the letter.

Ephesus (54-56) - proposed at the beginning of the 20th century. Here a is a problem, for we have no specific evidence that Paul was in prison at Ephesus. Yet during his three-year stay there, Ac 19:23-41 mentions an uproar in which Paul's companions were hauled before the magistrates, and Paul himself speaks of having fought "wild beasts"33 at Ephesus in a context that threatened his life (1 Co 15:32) and of having almost received a sentence of death while in Asia (2 Co 1:8-10). Also in 2 Co 6:5; 2 Co 11:23 (written before he was imprisoned at Caesarea and in Rome) Paul speaks of having already undergone many imprisonments.34 Thus imprisonment at Ephesus is a distinct possibility, and then b, c, d, and/would offer no difficulty.35 As for e, Timothy was definitely with Paul at Ephesus (1 Co 4:17; 1Co 16:10; Ac 19:22); also the details in g fit Ephesus better than either Caesarea or Rome. From Ephesus to Philippi a direct sea journey, or one by land to Troas and then by sea, would be only about 400 miles and take seven to {496} nine days. Moreover, the references to Timothy just cited show that Paul did send emissaries into Macedonia when he was at Ephesus. An objection to the Ephesus theory is that 1 Cor, sent from there, mentions a collection to be taken up for the Jerusalem church throughout the whole Pauline missionary territory, and Phil does not.36 But neither does Gal37 (or Phlm), plausibly written at Ephesus, even though the collection would be taken in the Gala-tian area (1 Co 16:1). Paul's stay at Ephesus and subsequent travel to Corinth (whence he would go to Jerusalem) covered a time span of four years. Gathering and bringing a collection to Jerusalem would not have been a matter of urgency throughout the entire period, especially if during that time he was in prison at Ephesus and might die (obviously without getting to Jerusalem). It would have become more urgent toward the end of the Ephesus period when Paul was released from prison and could plan his travels, and then again, when he had left Ephesus and was journeying through Macedonia to Corinth (see 2 Co 8-9; Rm 15:26-28- at which time the Macedonian Christians did contribute). Indeed, the collection argument actually works in favor of Ephesus and a dating ca. 55: If Phil were written at Caesarea or Rome, that successful collection would have been past history; why, then, in reciting the history of the Philippians' generosity in Ph 4:10-20, does Paul not mention their contribution to it? Moreover, in 4:14-16 Paul reminisces about what seems to have been his first and only visit to Philippi. If he were writing from Caesarea or Rome, he would have been to Philippi at least three times (n. 3 above).

There is no way to decide this issue; but the best arguments seem to be on the side of Ephesus, and the weakest on the side of Caesarea.

Unity: One Letter or Two or Three?

Although the unity of many of the Pauline letters has been questioned in the endless ingenuity of scholarship, only two have remained subjects of major debate: 2Co and Ph What external and internal evidence causes uncertainty about the unity of Phil (which began to be doubted at the end of the 19th century)? Externally, in the mid-2d century Polycarp (Philippians 3:2) mentions Paul's "letters" to the Philippians.38 If precise, this could refer to the canonical letter and lost ones, or to the canonical letter and 2 Thess {497} (Chapter 26, n. 9 below), or to the original form of the canonical correspondence before an editor combined several letters into one. Internally, Ph 3:1b ("To write the same things to you is no trouble to me") suggests that Paul might have written previously to the Philippians. If so, was he referring to a lost letter or to an originally independent section of what now has been collected as Phil? At the end of chap. 2 (vv. 23-30) Paul alludes to his travel plans, which he usually does toward the conclusion of his letters; and the "Finally" in the following verse (3:1a) sounds as if he is about to close the letter; yet two chaps, follow. Is it logical to have the sending back of Epaphroditus mentioned (2:25-30) before his arrival bringing gifts to Paul (4:18)? Some think that (if 3:lb-4:3 were an insert from another letter) 3:1a and 4:4 would fit together uniquely well; also then the different adversaries detected in Phil could be assigned to different letters.

As for the letters thought to be combined in Phil, the common denominator in the several theories is that chap. 339 constitutes in whole or in part a separate letter:

Ĥ Two original letters (G. Bornkamm; J. Gnilka; E. J. Goodspeed; L. E. Keck),

e.g., I.3:lb-4:20: A letter when Paul received the gift brought by Epaphroditus;

II.1:1-3:1a + 4:21-23: A letter after Epaphroditus recovered from sickness.40

Ĥ Three original letters (more popular: F. W. Beare, J. A. Fitzmyer, R. H. Fuller, H. Koester; E. Lohse, W. Marxsen, W. Schmithals), e.g., I.4:10-20: A letter acknowledging the gift received by Paul from the Philippians;

II.1:1-3:la + 4:4-7, 21-23: A letter urging a worthy life, rejoicing in the Lord;

III.3:lb-4:3 + 4:8-9: A corrective and polemical letter.

There is no doubt that the Body of Philippians (1:12-4:20; see Summary Page) has a mixture of material, wherein Paul switches back and forth between autobiographical description (his position in prison and relations with the Philippians through Epaphroditus and Timothy), exhortations, and warnings against false teachers. The division into two or three letters is really an attempt of scholars to rearrange that material more logically and consistently. Yet one cannot find in Phil two or three distinct Opening and Concluding Formulas, so that if originally there were several letters, the compiler {498} abbreviated them. Moreover, his logic in moving segments around (e.g., 4:8-9) and combining these letters into the present irregular sequence is far from clear. Favoring unity is the fact that there are rare Pauline words and a community of ideas shared by the proposed two or three letters. Approximately, therefore, an equal number of scholars still maintains that the present form of Phil is the original form. One can postulate that in prison Paul wrote in a "stream of consciousness" style, communicating his grateful acknowledgments of past relationships and present kindnesses, his exhortations and corrections as they came to mind, without recasting them in a totally logical sequence. In any case this debate41 need not be of great concern to ordinary readers who, given the very divided state of scholarship, are wiser to read the letter in its present sequence, recognizing that it reflects relationships over a period of time and that more than one danger may be envisioned.

Issues and Problems for Reflection

(1) In discussing the unity of Phil, I suggested that the debate over whether the preserved letter represents a compilation from two or three original let ters is not of great importance to most readers. That affirmation may be tested by studying one of the theories of compilation and seeing if there are ways in which it affects the basic meaning of Ph (2) It is a worthwhile exercise to review the way in which the Christologi- cal Hymn is printed in several modern NT translations. What effect, if any, does a decision about the number of strophes and the lines assigned to each (n. 19 and 20 above) have on meaning?

(3) Paul seems remarkably self-revelatory in Ph Based on its contents, what would have been Paul's strengths as a pastor in relation to the community at Philippi? He is clearly polemic toward the workers of evil in 3:2ff. How effective is what he says in refuting them? Granted that he is not likely to change their minds, how likely is his approach to protect or correct the Philippians whom both he and they are addressing?

(4) Because of his imprisonment Paul reflects several times in this letter on his relationship to Christ and in that way reveals his own "spirituality." For instance, Paul invites his readers to imitate him (3:17) and to imitate Christ (2:5). Indeed, at the beginning of the letter Paul calls himself a servant of Christ to prepare for speaking of Christ as one who took on or accepted {499} "the form of a servant" in 2:7. Notice that the imitation is not simply a human undertaking (2:13). How practical is such imitation after nearly two thousand years?

(5) In the Opening Formula Paul addresses himself to the saints at Philippi "with the episkopoi (overseers/bishops) and diakonoi (ministers/deacons)." Discussion of those two groups of functionaries42 has been colored by modern Christian attitudes toward bishops, favorable and unfavorable. To avoid such an early presence of bishops (of which there is no evidence in the other proto Pauline letters) some scholars have dismissed this as a later interpolation or sought to detect Pauline disdain for such dignitaries (implicitly con trasted with the self-designation of Paul and Timothy who claim only to be "servants" of Christ). Many more scholars today caution that the Philippian episkopoi were not the same as the functionaries of that name described at a later era in the deutero Pauline Pastorals. (For instance, since secular episkopoi were financial officers of groups, could Paul have been addressing those at Philippi who helped raise the money to support him?) Nothing fur ther, however, is said in Phil; and so scholars' statements about these figures involve considerable guessing. A more helpful exercise, employing the evi dence of contemporaneous Pauline writings, is to compare the "overseers" at Philippi to "those over you (proistamenoi) in the Lord" in 1 Th 5:12, to the "administrators" (kyberneseis) in 1 Co 12:28 , and to "the one who exhorts" (parakalori) in Rm 12:8. To that may be added what Ac 12:17; Ac 15:2,4,6,22,23; Ac 21:18 reports about James and the elders/presbyters at Jeru salem. Seemingly the churches of the 50s were structured, but not in the same way or with universally used titles.

(6) After reflecting on the different views reported in the subsection above about the christology of the hymn in 2:5-11, one may compare themes in that passage to other Pauline and deutero Pauline passages such as 1 Co 8:6; 2 Co 5:18-19; 2 Co 8:9; Rm 5:12-19; Col 1:15-20.

(7) Paul identifies himself as having been a Pharisee (3:5; see Ac 23:6); and therefore, even before believing in Jesus, he would have anticipated the resurrection of the dead. We have seen one modification of his belief in 1 Th 4:15-17 where he asserts that the dead in Christ will rise to meet him at the parousia. Yet, even before the parousia, Paul thinks that if he departs this life he will be with Christ (Ph 1:23). In 3:11, perhaps rhetorically, he says, "If possible, I may attain the resurrection from the dead."43 How does one reconcile these expectations? With what modality are such expectations part of Christian hope today? {500}

(8) The social situation at Philippi when Paul first came may belong more appropriately to the study of Ac 16:12-40, but Lydia was prominent there even as Euodia and Syntyche were important in the community that Paul wrote to five to ten years later (Ph 4:2). Thomas and Portefaix offer material that invites fascinating reflection on what the gospel of Christ may have meant to women in this Roman city that was the first place in Europe evangelized by Paul.

The First Letter to the Corinthians

The Background

General Analysis of the Message

Those Criticized by Paul at Corinth

Paul's Critique of Fornicators and Homosexuals (6:9-10)

Charisms at Corinth (1 Co 12 and 14) and Today

The "Hymn" to Love (1 Co 13)

Paul and the Risen Jesus (1 Co 15)

Issues and Problems for Reflection

Paul's known contacts with Corinth lasted nearly a decade, and there is more Pauline correspondence to that city than to any other place. Indeed traces of as many as seven letters have been detected (pp. 548-49 below). The disturbed state of the Christians at Corinth explains the need for so much attention. Paradoxically, the range of their problems (rival "theologians," factions, problematic sexual practices, marital obligations, liturgy, church roles) makes the correspondence exceptionally instructive for troubled Christians and churches of our times. Attempts to live according to the gospel in the multiethnic and crosscultural society at Corinth raised issues still encountered in multiethnic, multiracial, and crosscultural societies today. Paul's style of questions and debate with quoted statements makes his presentation of those issues vivacious and attractive, and has led scholars to discuss the precise rhetoric employed. For those studying Paul seriously for the first time, if limitations mean that only one of the thirteen letters can be examined in depth, 1Co may well be the most rewarding. Accordingly, after the Background, the General Analysis will delineate the message at greater length than usual; then subsections will be devoted to: Those criticized by Paul at Corinth, his Condemnation of fornicators and homosexuals, Charisms at Corinth (1 Co 12 and 14), the Hymn to love (1 Co 13), Paul and the risen Jesus (1 Co 15), Issues for reflection, and Bibliography.

The Background

The mainland of Greece (Achaia) is connected to the large Peloponnesus peninsula to the south by a narrow, four-mile-wide isthmus, with the Aegean Sea to the east and the Ionian or Adriatic Sea to the west. On a plateau controlling this isthmus, astride the very important north-south land route to the peninsula and situated in between ports on the two seas, was the city of Corinth2 (towered over on the south by a 1:850-foot-high acropolis hill,

{512}

Summary of Basic Information

Date: Late 56 or very early 57 from Ephesus (or 54/55 in the Revisionist Chronology).

To: Mixed church of Jews and Gentiles at Corinth converted by Paul in 50/51-52 (or 42-43). Authenticity: Not seriously disputed.

Unity: Some see two or more separate letters interwoven, but unity is favored by an increasing majority, even if the one letter was composed in disjunctive stages as information and a letter came to Paul from Corinth.

Integrity: No widely agreed-on major interpolations, although there is some debate about 14:34-35 and chap. 13; a lost letter preceded (1 Co 5:9).

Formal Division:

A. Opening Formula: 1:1-3

B. Thanksgiving: 1:4-9

C. Body: 1:10-16:18

D. Concluding Formula: 16:19-24.

Division According to Contents:

1:1-9: Address/greetings and Thanksgiving, reminding Corinthians of their spiritual gifts

1:10-4:21: Part I: The factions

5:1-11:34: Part II: Problems of behavior (incest, lawsuits, sexual behavior, marriage, food, eucharist, liturgy); what Paul has heard and questions put to him

12:1-14:40: Part III: Problems of charisms and the response of love

15:1-58: Part IV: The resurrection of Christ and of the Christian

16:1-18: The collection, Paul's travel plans, commendations of people

16:19-24: Greetings; Paul's own hand; "Our Lord, come."

Acrocorinth). Called "the light of all Greece" by Cicero, this spot had already been settled for more than four thousand years when the Greek city effectively came to an end through defeat by the Romans in 146 bc. The replacement city to which Paul came in ad 50/51-52 had been founded a century before (44 bc) as a Roman colony by Julius Caesar. In one sense, then, Corinth was like Philippi; but its strategic placement attracted a more cosmopolitan population, for poor immigrants came from Italy to dwell there, including freed slaves of Greek, Syrian, Jewish, and Egyptian origin. The lst-century bc Greek poet Crinagoras described these people as scoundrels, but many of them soon became wealthy. Their skills made the site {513} thrive as a manufacturing (bronze and terra cotta items) and commercial center. Indeed, under Augustus it became the capital city of the province of Achaia, whence the presence of the proconsul Gallio (brother of the famous Seneca) who dealt with Paul (Ac 18:12).

Archaeology enables accurate reconstruction of the Roman city2 and attests to the multicultural ambiance. Although Latin may have been the first language of the Roman colony, inscriptions show the wide use of Greek, the language of commerce. The standard Greek deities were honored by temples, and the Egyptian cult of Isis and Serapis is attested. Homage to the emperors was augmented by imperial patronage extended to the Panhellenic Isthmian games held every other year in the spring (including ad 51); they were outranked in importance only by the Olympic games. Although archaeological evidence is lacking, except for a synagogue lintel (see Ac 18:4), there was a large lst-century ad Jewish colony with its own officials and internal management, perhaps augmented by Claudius's expulsion of Jews from Rome in ad 49 (Chapter 16 above, n. 24).

Greek Corinth acquired an overblown reputation (partly through slander) for sexual license, so that Greek words for whoremongers, prostitution, and fornication were coined employing the city's name. Despite references to this "city of love" with a thousand priestesses of Aphrodite (Venus) who were sacred prostitutes, only two small temples to that goddess have been found. Whatever may have been true of Greek Corinth, we should think of Roman Corinth simply as having all the problems of a rough, relatively new boomtown adjacent to two seaports. Yet it also had advantages from Paul's point of view. The travelers passing through Corinth, including those visiting the famous healing shrine of Aesculapius or attending the Isthmian games, would need tents for temporary housing, so that a tentmaker or leath-erworker like Paul (and Aquila and Priscilla; Ac 18:2-3) could find work and self-support there.3 Because of the many who came and went, he would not be rejected as an outsider or even a resident alien; and the seed of the gospel that he sowed in Corinth might well be carried far and disseminated by those whom he evangelized. Furnish ("Corinth") has many interesting suggestions about how what Paul writes was affected by the building projects, festivals, artifacts, and agriculture of the site.

Paul's contacts with Corinth were complicated. It may help to be quite arithmetical in recounting those that led up to 1 Cor (the continuation leading up to 2Co may be found on p. 541 below). In addition to numerals used to designate the moments of contact, I shall use capital letters of the alphabet {514} to designate Paul's letters to Corinth, some of which correspondence has been lost. I shall keep referring to these numerals (§) and letters throughout this Chapter and the next.

(§ 1) ad 50/51-52. According to Ac 18:1-3 Aquila and Priscilla (almost certainly Jewish Christians) were at Corinth when Paul arrived there. Some challenge that sequence because in 1 Co 3:6,10; 1 Co 4:15 Paul claims that at Corinth he planted and laid the foundation and fathered the Christian community. We may wonder, however, whether that language excludes the possibility that a few Christians were on the scene before he came. Paul's experiences in Philippi and Thessalonica had been marked by hostility and/or rejection, so that he came to Corinth in fear and trembling (1 Co 2:3); yet he stayed there a year and a half. Even if we make allowance for rhetorical overstatement, Paul's claim that he did not speak with the eloquence of human wisdom (2:4-5; also 2 Co 11:6) probably means that he would not have appealed to the academically sophisticated - a change of tactics from his approach just before this in Athens, if we can depend on Ac 17:16-34. The picture in Ac 18:2-4 is that Paul began his evangelizing with the Jews, lodging in the house of his fellow tentmakers Aquila and Priscilla and preaching in the synagogue. Then (Ac 18:5-7; 1 Th 3:1,2,6) after the arrival of Silas and Timothy from Macedonia with news about the Thessalonian Christians, he shifted to the Gentiles, moving to the house of Jason, a God-fearer (i.e., a Gentile sympathetic to Judaism). From the names mentioned in 1 Co 16:15-18 and Rm 16:21-23, we detect the presence of both Jewish and Gentile converts at Corinth, with the latter somewhat in the majority. Predominantly those converted by Paul would have been from the lower to middle strata of society, with artisans and ex-slaves far outnumbering the rich.4 We shall see that some difficulties about the eucharistic meal may have been caused by the interaction of rich and poor at Corinth. Paul's initial preaching at Corinth must have been strongly eschatological or even apocalyptic, since symbolically he refused to accept money, lived a celibate life (an indication that this was not a lasting world), worked signs and wonders (2 Co 12:12), and spoke in tongues (1 Co 14:18; see p. 284 {515} above). Before Paul's stay at Corinth was over, the Jews dragged him before the proconsul Gallio (Ac 18:12-17). That backfired, however: Gallio released Paul, while Sosthenes, the ruler of the synagogue, was beaten.

(§ 2) ad 52-56? After Paul left Corinth in 52 with Priscilla and Aquila (Ac 18:18), other missionaries came; and the vivacious preaching of a man like Apollos5 may have catalyzed spirited elements within the Corinthian community, producing some of the enthusiasm that Paul would have to criticize in 1 Cor.

(§ 3)1 Co 5:9 refers to a letter Paul had written (Letter A, lost6), warning the Corinthians not to have dealings with immoral people.

(§ 4) (ca. ad 56). While staying at Ephesus (54-57), Paul got reports about Corinth, e.g., from "those of Chloe" (1 Co 1:11; also 11:18). We know nothing of Chloe: whether she lived at Corinth (with contacts at Ephesus?) or at Ephesus; whether she was a Christian; whether "those of Chloe" were her family or her household or her business establishment; whether she had sent them or they were traveling from Corinth to Ephesus.

(§ 5) About the same time or shortly afterward at Ephesus, Paul received a letter from the Corinthians (1 Co 7:1), perhaps in reply to his Letter A and seemingly brought by Stephanas, Fortunatus, and Achaicus (16:17-18) who probably added their own reports.

(§ 6) Paul wrote 1Co from Ephesus (Letter B).7 Although there have been attempts to see 1Co as an amalgamation of once totally distinct letters, it is best evaluated as a single missive sent to the Corinthian Christians, even if composed in two stages responding to § 4 and § 5 respectively. With that background, let us look through I Cor.

General Analysis of the Message

The Opening Formula (1:1-3) joins to Paul as co-sender Sosthenes (p. 413 above). Seemingly this is the same man, now a Christian, who earlier was the ruler of the Corinthian synagogue and was beaten before the bema when Gallio refused to judge Paul (§ 1; Ac 18:17). Did Paul dictate the {516} letter to him (16:21)?8 In the first nine verses, which include the Thanksgiving (1:4-9), Paul mentions (Jesus) Christ nine times, an emphasis befitting Paul's coming correction of Corinthian factionalism by insisting that they were baptized in the name of Christ and of no other. He also gives thanks that the Corinthians have been given grace (charis) enriching them in speech and knowledge and that they were not lacking in any charism - an ironic touch since he will have to castigate them in the letter about their pretended wisdom and their fights over charisms. Another way in which the Thanksgiving anticipates the letter's contents, is that, as it comes to an end, it refers to the day of the Lord, the theme of 1Co 15:50-58, as the letter draws to a close.

Part I of the Body of the Letter (1:10-4:21). Almost four chapters are addressed to the problem of divisions or factions that exist at Corinth, about which Paul has been informed by members of Chloe's household (§ 4).9 As a result of the activity described under § 2 above, but probably without any incentive from the missionaries themselves,10 there were now conflicting loyalties among the Corinthian Christians who had declared preferences: " 'I belong to Paul,' or 'I belong to Apollos,' or 'I belong to Cephas (Peter),' or 'I belong to Christ' " (1 Cor l:12).n Christians today have become accustomed to being divided; and so, except for the speed with which they occurred, we are not surprised by such divisions. What more likely surprises us is Paul's response, for we are accustomed to people defending their own choice among ecclesiastical divisions and attacking rival positions. Paul does not defend the faction that "belongs" to him or stress his own superiority, since all the preachers are only servants (3:5). "Is Christ divided? Was it Paul who was crucified for you or was it in Paul's name that you were baptized?" (1:13). "Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas... you belong to Christ, and Christ belongs to God" (3:22-23). {517}

The existence of these divisions reflected different personal loyalties among the Corinthian Christians. Also, however, in choosing a particular preacher, like Apollos, some Corinthians may have been opting for what sounded like greater wisdom, whereas Paul without eloquence had preached a foolishness really wiser than human wisdom, namely, Christ and him crucified (1:18-2:5).12 This was the mysterious wisdom of God hidden from the rulers of the present age who crucified the Lord of glory; it was proclaimed by Paul in words taught by the Spirit - thus spiritual truths in spiritual words (2:6-16). Paul laid down a solid foundation, indeed, the only possible foundation, Jesus Christ; and on the day of judgment everything else that is insubstantial will be shown up and burned off (3:10-15). The Corinthians ought to realize that they are God's temple in which the Spirit lives, and despise the wisdom of this world as foolishness in God's sight (3:16-23). In a highly rhetorical manner Paul contrasts "us apostles" (4:9) to the Corinthians, who in their religious stance are proud even though they have nothing that they did not receive (4:7). "Here we are, fools for Christ, while you are so wise in Christ..." (4:10-13). This letter is a warning from a father to his children, and Timothy is being sent to Corinth23 to remind them of Paul's life and teaching before Paul himself comes to test the arrogant. "Shall I come to you with a stick, or with love in a spirit of gentleness?" (4:17-21).

Part 2 of the Body of the Letter (5:1-11:34). Next Paul turns to various problems of Christian behavior among the Corinthians.14 Apparently chaps. 5-6 involve things he has heard about Corinthian Christian practice,15 and issues of sex and marriage come up in over half his instructions. Today correctives about sex are often dismissed as Victorian, but that gives her Britannic majesty credit for something that goes back to the 1st century in Christianity. Responsible sexual behavior in and out of marriage is a major issue in life; and inevitably what belief in Christ meant for such behavior {518} became a problem, especially since the Jews and Gentiles who came to faith did not always share the same presuppositions. The first instance addressed by Paul (5:1-5) involves a man and his stepmother. Seemingly the man's father had died and he wishes to marry the widowed second wife who might be about his own age. From Paul's own teaching that Christians were a new creation, did the man or even the community ("And you are proud") think that previous relationships no longer mattered? Paul's outrage about this behavior betrays his Jewish roots; for marriage within such a degree of kindred was forbidden by the Mosaic Law (Lv 18:8; Lv 20:11). He bases his argumentation, however, on the claim that such behavior was not tolerated even among the Gentiles.16 That causes many scholars to think that Gentile converts to Christianity at Corinth had mistakenly taken Paul's proclamations of freedom to mean that there were no old rules of behavior (see also 1 Co 6:12). Paul's authority to issue an excommunication even from a distance is invoked in 5:4-5; and what follows in reference to the letter he had already sent them (Letter A; § 3)17 shows that his main concern is not about the immorality of the world outside the community but sinfulness within the community that might leaven it harmfully (5:6-13; Jewish imagery, from Passover practice).

Paul's Jewish distrust of the standards of the Pagan world is reflected in his insistence that disputes are to be settled by having fellow Christians act as judges rather than going before Gentile courts (6:1-8) and in his list of vices of which the Corinthian Christians were formerly guilty (6:9-11). In 6:12 we hear a slogan in circulation at Corinth that presumably is at the root of much of what Paul condemns: "For me everything is permissible."18 Paul qualifies it by insisting that not everything brings about good and by insisting that none of our choices must produce mastery over us. Real freedom does not have to be expressed to remain freedom. People do not live in a neutral environment: To indulge in loose behavior is not freedom but bondage to compulsions that enslave. Sexual permissiveness affects the Christian's body, which should be evaluated as a member of Christ's body (6:15) and the temple of the Holy Spirit (6:19). One's body is a means of self- {519} communication, and so intercourse produces a union between the partners. Union of one who is a member of Christ with an unworthy partner, such as a prostitute, disgraces Christ, just as marital union glorifies God (6:20).19

Turning from what he has heard about the Corinthians, in chap. 7 Paul begins to answer questions that have been posed to him.20 The first involves the statement (his own or one coined at Corinth?): "It is good for a man not to touch a woman."21 (This lively pattern of citing statements or slogans and then discussing them has often been looked on as Paul's imitation of the Cynic diatribe pattern; see p. 89 above.) Although abstention from sex is laudable in itself, Paul does not encourage it within marriage because it could create temptations and effect injustice. He encourages marriage for those who cannot exercise control, even though "I would like everyone to be as I am myself" - Paul seemingly means without a wife (widower or never married?) and, of course, practicing abstinence (7:2-9).

To those already married (perhaps thinking of a specific couple) Paul repeats the Lord's ruling (p. 141 above) against divorce and remarriage (7:10-11), but then adds a ruling of his own that permits separation when one of the partners is not a Christian and will not live in peace with the believer (7:12-16).22 In 7:17-40 Paul shows the extent to which his thinking is apocalyptic: He would have all people (circumcised Jew, uncircumcised Gentile, slave,23 celibate, married, widow) stay in the state in which they were when called to Christ because the time has become limited.24 See pp. 509-10 above for the problem of evaluating "Interim ethics," and of {520} determining in such an outlook of Christ-coming-back-soon what constitutes enduring moral guidance for Christians two thousand years later. Certainly that outlook remains a factor for advocating celibacy: As a Christian virtue it makes no sense unless accompanied by other signs (voluntary poverty, self-giving) projecting faith that this is not a lasting world.

In chap. 8 Paul answers questions about food that had been sacrificed to the gods and then offered to whoever would buy it.25 Since there are no gods other than the one God, the Father and source from whom are all things,26 it is quite irrelevant that food has been offered to gods. Thus Christians have freedom: "We are no worse off if we do not eat, nor better off if we do" (8:8). Yet pastorally Paul is concerned about weak converts whose understanding is imperfect and who might think that sitting and eating in the temple of a false god involves worship of that god and thus might commit idolatry by eating. Therefore, one must be careful not to scandalize those weak believers.27 Paul's stance is governed by the statement with which he opens this discussion (8:2): Knowledge, even correct knowledge, can puff up the self, but love builds up others and thus puts constraints on self-serving behavior. (The notion of pastoral limitations on one's rights can be an important challenge to a generation that constantly speaks of rights but not of responsibilities.) If eating would cause them to fall, it is better not to eat (8:13). Somewhat disjointedly he comes back to this same issue in 10:23-33: "Never be a cause of scandal to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God" (10:32).

In chap. 9 Paul gives an impassioned defense of his rights as an apostle. Others may deny that he is an apostle; but he has seen the risen Lord, and the work he has done in conversion is proof of his apostleship. It is not insecurity about his status that has caused Paul to pass over his rights as an apostle, e.g., his right to be fed and supported, or to be accompanied by a {521} Christian wife who would also have to be supported.28 Rather he supported himself and preached the gospel free of charge lest a request for support put an obstacle to belief (i.e., people would think he was preaching for money). Two wonderfully rhetorical passages (9:15-18, 19-23) exhibit Paul at his best. He is clearly proud of what he has accomplished through his sacrifices; and yet in another sense he was under divine compulsion: "Woe to me if I do not proclaim the gospel!" And in this proclamation he became all things to all that he might win over more people: To those under the Law he became as one under the Law; to those outside the Law, as one outside the Law; to the weak, as one who was weak. (This passage should be a warning to all those who would find rigorous ideology in Paul's thought: Foremost he was a missionary - see the discussion of Pauline consistency on p. 437 above.) In 9:24-27 he ends this issue of how he has straggled in his ministry with a fascinating use of imagery from athletic competitions that would be very familiar to the Corinthians, for whom the Isthmian games loomed large.29 He has subjected himself to punishing disciplinary training lest, after proclaiming the gospel to others, he himself should be disqualified.

Chaps. 10-11 deal with more problems at Corinth, predominantly those affecting community worship. In 10:1-13, citing the exodus where many Israelites who had passed through the sea and received divinely supplied nourishment nevertheless displeased God, Paul warns the Corinthians against sexual immorality, discouragement by trials, and worship of false gods - all examples from the testing of Israel in the desert that "were written as a lesson to us on whom the culmination of the ages has come."30 In 10:2 and 14-22 Paul writes of baptism and of the eucharistic cup of blessing that is a sharing (koinonia) in the blood of Christ and bread-breaking that is a sharing in the body of Christ (10:16). Here Paul supplies some important insights for subsequent sacramental theology because he makes it clear that through baptism and the eucharist God delivers and sustains Christians, and yet also shows that such exalted help does not immunize those who receive the sacraments from sin or exempt them from divine judgment. Since the many partakers are one body,31 participation in the eucharist is irreconcilable with participation in Pagan sacrifices that are in fact being offered to demons {522} and make people partners with demons.32 One cannot participate both in the table of the Lord and the table of demons. Interrupting the issue of the eucharist, 11:1-16 supplies directions for community "liturgical behavior": A man must pray or prophesy with head bared, while a woman must have her head covered. The theological basis offered for this demand (a man is the glorious reflection of God, while the woman reflects the man; because of angels the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head33) may not have been deemed fully probative even by Paul himself, for at the end (11:16) he resorts to the authority of his own custom and those of the churches.

Then in 11:17-34 Paul returns to the eucharist and the meal in which it was set,34 bluntly expressing his displeasure with Corinthian behavior. Divisions (those of chaps. 1-4?) are being carried over to "the Lord's Supper," where the Corinthians meet together as a church (11:18) to reenact a remembrance of what Jesus did and said on the night he was given over until he comes (11:20, 23-26). Seemingly some have a meal that precedes the special bread-breaking and cup of blessing, while others ("those who have nothing") are excluded and go hungry. Perhaps this echoes a social situation where the need for a large space means that eucharistic meetings are in the home of a wealthy person; all Christians including the poor and slaves have to be accepted into the hospitality area of the house for the eucharist, but the owner is inviting to his table only well-off friends of status for the preparatory meal.35 That is not Paul's notion of the church of God (11:22); either all {523} should come together to eat the meal, or they should eat first in their own homes (11:33-34). The whole purpose of the sacred breaking of the bread is koinonia (10:16), not division of the community. One also sins against the body and blood of the Lord if one eats the bread and drinks the cup unworthily (11:27), seemingly by failing to discern that it is the body and blood of the Lord (11:29).36 Indeed, Paul contends that judgment is already falling on the Corinthians for some have died and many are sick (11:30). Despite the Book of Job, a correlation between sin and sickness/death has remained strong in Jewish thought!

Part III of the Body of the Letter (12:1-14:40). Chaps. 12 and 14 deal with the spiritual gifts or charisms given in abundance to the Corinthian Christians, while chap. 13, sometimes called a hymn to love, appears as an interruption corrective of any acquisitiveness about charisms.37 These chaps, have received so much attention that it seems best to discuss them separately and more fully (see subsections below). Here I might comment on only one aspect of what is implied by the picture Paul has painted. Because 12:28 lists apostles, prophets, and teachers as the first charisms, most often the Corinthian community is thought to have been administered by charismatics, i.e., those who were recognized to have been given one of those charisms by the Spirit. Yet the picture is complicated because a special charism of "administration" is also listed in 12:28. Moreover, we know relatively little of how functions were divided among apostles, prophets, and teachers, and to what extent apostles other than Paul were involved. Even if Ep 4:11 was written years later, its order of apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers warns us that the assignment of function may not have been exact or uniform. The description of the speaking of prophets in 1 Co 14:29-33 shows how hard it is to be sure what prophets did.38 In 14:34-35, immediately after a description of prophecy, women are excluded from speaking in {524} churches; yet 11:5 allows women to pray or prophesy with their head covered.39 The idea that in the 50s all the Pauline churches were administered charismatically in the same way as Corinth (and that twenty or thirty years later this changed to a moire institutionalized bishop-deacon structure pictured in the Pastorals) is risky because of both the lack of information in most of the other letters written at this time, and the reference to bishops and deacons at Philippi (Ph 1:1).40

Part IV of the Body of the Letter (15:1-58). Here Paul describes the gospel in terms of the resurrection of Jesus and then draws implications from that for the resurrection of Christians.41 shall devote a subsection below to many subsidiary issues about Paul's notion of the resurrection stemming from this chap., while here I concentrate on the function of the resurrection in Paul's message to Corinth. Some Corinthian Christians have been saying that there is no resurrection of the dead (15:12). It is not clear what these people think happened to Jesus; but the argument makes good sense if they thought that Jesus had risen bodily from the dead,42 and in 15:1-11 Paul is reminding them of that common tradition. Jesus rose from the dead and appeared to such known figures as Cephas, the Twelve, James (the brother of the Lord), and Paul himself (15:3-8; also 9:1) - a tradition totally conformed to the Scriptures and solidly attested: "Whether, then, it was I or they, thus we preach and thus you believed" (15:11). As for the fate of others, those whom Paul would correct may have thought that the equivalent of resurrection had been accomplished already by the coming of the Spirit so that nothing else was to be expected. Rather, basing himself on what happened to Christ, Paul contends that all the dead are to be raised (15:12-19), that the resurrection is future (15:20-34), and bodily (15:35-50). In this argument he teaches that those fallen asleep in Christ are not lost (also 2 Co 4:14). Indeed, Christ is the firstfruits of those fallen asleep: As in Adam all died, so in Christ all {525} shall be made alive (1Co 15:20-22).43 There is an eschatological order: first, Christ; then at his return, those who belong to Christ; then at the end, when he has destroyed every dominion, authority and power, and subjected all enemies (with death as the last enemy44), Christ hands over to the Father the kingdom; finally, the Son himself will be subjected to God, who put all things under him so that God may be all in all (15:23-28).

Resurrection is not an abstract issue for Paul; rather, the hope of being raised explains his willingness to suffer as he has in Ephesus, from which he writes this letter (15:30-34). In 15:35-58 Paul concentrates on another objection raised at Corinth to the resurrection of the dead: With what kind of body? (This has remained an objection over the centuries as the earthly remains of millions of people have disintegrated and disappeared.) Paul gives a subtle answer: Resurrection will involve a transformed body, as different as the grown plant is from the seed - a body imperishable, not perishable; powerful, not weak; spiritual (pneumatikos), not physical (psychikos); in the image of heavenly origin, not from the dust of the earth. After all, "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God" (15:50). At the end, whether alive or dead, we shall all be changed and be clothed with the imperishable and immortal (15:51-54). The "bottom line" in response to the Corinthians who deny the resurrection is that death has lost its sting because God has given us victory through our Lord Jesus Christ (15:55-58).

Body Closing (16:1-18) and Concluding Formula (16:19-24). The Closing of 1 Cor gives instructions for the Corinthians to take up the collection for Jerusalem45 and outlines Paul's plan. Paul wants to stay at Ephesus at least till Pentecost (May/June ad 57?) because, despite opposition, an opportunity for evangelizing work has opened for him. Yet he plans to come to Corinth via Macedonia and perhaps to spend the winter (ad 57-58?) there. Whenever Timothy comes (n. 13 above), he is to be treated well (16:10-11). As for Apollos, although Paul had urged him to return to Corinth, he is unwilling to do so at this time, presumably lest he exacerbate the factionalism there (16:12).

Although the concluding greetings (including those from Aquila and {526} Prisca/Priscilla) are warm, when Paul takes up a pen to add a touch with his own hand, he acts as a judge, cursing anyone at Corinth who does not love the Lord (16:22). Still his last words are positive, not only extending love to all, but also uttering a prayer that evidently even the Corinthians know in the mother tongue of Jesus (Aramaic MardnS tha': "Our Lord, come").

Those Criticized by Paul at Corinth

In chaps. 1-4 Paul corrects factionalism among the Corinthians, not by addressing each group separately but by criticizing the whole community of Christians for allowing themselves to be split up into the three or four groups of adherents (n. 11 above). He does not tell us whether there were theological differences among the groups beyond their loyalties to different individuals; but scholars have felt free to assign distinct individual stances to each.46 For example, often a conservative adherence to the Law is attributed to the Cephas (Peter) faction, despite the fact that 1 Co 15:5,11 indicates that Cephas and Paul preached a common message. There is no evidence that the missionaries whose names designate the factions (Paul, Apollos, Cephas) were blamed by Paul for encouraging such factionalism. Was the formation of the groups spontaneous, or did some of those whose slogans are criticized in subsequent chapters of 1 Cor have a role in generating the factionalism? In the next paragraphs I shall discuss the ideas criticized by Paul, but there is little evidence that these came from abroad to Corinth. Perhaps the groups gave voice to tendencies already present, e.g., inadequate Gentile understandings of Christian ideas derived from Judaism. Were the three or four factions organized into separate house-churches? Answers to that question are largely guesses since there is little information in I-2Co on house-churches, beyond their existence (1Co 16:19; Rm 16:23). Indeed,1 Co 14:23 envisions the possibility of the whole church coming together.

The words sophia ("wisdom") and sophos ("wise") occur over twenty-five times in chaps. 1-3, as the wisdom of God (which others consider foolishness) is contrasted with human wisdom. The criticism of Jews and Greeks, both of whom reject the Christ who was the wisdom of God, shows that Paul is not criticizing any one view of human wisdom, even if forms of Greek philosophy were included under the wisdom looked for by Greeks (1:22). Although in chaps. 1-4 gnosis occurs only in 1:5, a considerable {527} number of scholars has contended that Paul was criticizing a gnostic movement at Corinth.47 For evidence they sometimes turn to the later chapters of 1 Cor, e.g., "We all possess knowledge" (1 Co 8:1) and the discussion of knowledge in 1 Co 8:7-11; see also 1 Co 13:2,8; 1 Co 14:6. Certainly there were Christians at Corinth who were more knowledgeable than other Christians and thought themselves superior. But is the term "gnostics" appropriate for them as if they shared a great deal in common with the 2d-century systems that claimed a special revealed knowledge about how recipients possessed a spark of the divine and could escape from the material world?48 Paul, the founder of the Christian community at Corinth, departed ca. ad 52; had major gnostic teachers come and influenced the Christians by 56? (Peter was no gnostic, and Paul shows no apprehension about Apollos' views in 16:12.) Did the denial of the resurrection of the dead by some at Corinth (1Co 15:12,29) stem from a gnostic denial that Jesus was physically a human being who died and/ or the contention that true believers were already spiritually raised? Were Christians at Corinth saying "Jesus be cursed" (1 Co 12:3); and if so, were they thereby rejecting the idea that Christ (distinct from Jesus) had a genuine earthly existence?

This leads us into the problem of evaluating a number of slogans in 1 Cor. Besides those cited above, the following could be included: "All things are permissible for me" (1 Co 6:12; 1Co 10:23); "Food is meant for the stomach, and the stomach for food" (1 Co 6:13); "Avoid immorality; every other sin that a person may commit is outside the body" (1 Co 6:18); "It is good for a man not to touch a woman" (1 Co 7:1). Paul correctively modifies these slogans, and so they are being used by those whom he would admonish at Corinth. That modification, however, leaves open two major possibilities: These statements were originally coined either by Paul in evangelizing the Corinthians (but are now being misused) or by Paul's adversaries.49 In either case, one could posit their use in a system of thought whereby superior knowledge leads a group {528} (the "Christ" party?) toward libertinism on the principle that the body is unimportant, both as to what one does in the body and to what happens after death.

Finally there are other points in Paul's critique that may have nothing to do with a profound theological stance. The tendencies to go to secular courts with lawsuits (6:1-7) and for women to pray with their heads uncovered (11:5) may reflect nothing more than Corinthian social mores.

There is considerable surmise in this discussion of those whom Paul was correcting, and some have sought clarity by appealing to the portrayal of the opponents in 2Co as if there was a continuity between the two groups. Although that will be discussed on pp. 554-56 below, it explains the obscure through the equally obscure, since the physiognomy of the 2Co opponents is not overly clear.

Paul's Critique of Fornicators and Homosexuals (6:9-10)

Paul warns that those who practice a number of vices will not inherit the kingdom of heaven. Today almost all Christians would still join his condemnation of idolaters, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, slanderers, and robbers, whether or not they would assign to them all the same severe fate. But major problems have developed about three designations: pornoi, malakoi, and arsenokoitai. (The first and the third, which will be our main concern here, are joined in 1 Tm 1:10.)

Pornoi is understood to refer to the (sexually) immoral by RSV, NTV, NJB, and AB, and to fornicators by NABR and NRSV. Today, greater tolerance in First World society toward the living together of unmarried men and women and/or sexual intercourse between them has catalyzed a debate as to whether Paul was issuing a blanket condemnation of "fornication."50 Since in 6:15-18 Paul goes on to forbid a Christian man's joining his body with that of a prostitute (pome) and to condemn porneia, and since there was a Corinthian history of sacred prostitutes in the service of Aphrodite, some would argue that by pornoi in 6:9 Paul meant only those who indulged in sex for money, i.e., those involved with prostitutes. However, in 5:1, as an example of porneia among the Corinthians Paul holds up the man who was living with his stepmother - scarcely sex for profit.51 Because there is not adequate evidence for narrowing Paul's reference to pornoi, "Those who indulge in fornication" is a more accurate translation than "Those who use women prostitutes." {529}

The next two terms, malakoi and arsenokoitai, lead us to the issue of homosexuality; and E. P. Sanders (Paul 1991) 110-13) is wise in insisting that a necessary preliminary is understanding Greco-Roman attitudes where there was no overall condemnation of sexual relations with a person of the same sex. Indeed in Greek circles the homosexual activity of a grown man with an attractive youth could be considered part of cultured education since the beauty of the male body was highly esteemed. But in general it was shameful for a grown male to be the passive partner or play the woman's role - that was for slaves. (There is less information about female homosexuality, but there may have been a corresponding disdain for the woman who played the male or active role.) As for Jews, as Sanders points out, they condemned homosexuality "lock, stock, and barrel," i.e., both passive and active.52 Although some scholars disagree, in all likelihood Paul with his two nouns is also condemning passive and active homosexuality.

Malakoi (literally, "soft") could refer to the effeminate, and some would argue for the translation "dissolute." Yet in the Greco-Roman world it was a designation for catamites, men or boys (particularly the latter) who were kept for sexual use, playing the receptive, feminine role. "Boy prostitutes" and "male prostitutes" are translations offered by the NABR and NRSV. (Since there is no serious tendency in today's society to be tolerant toward pederasty or male prostitution, this is not the word that causes the major problem.) The debate has centered on arsenokoitai (literally, "those who go to bed with males"), translated as "sodomites" (NRSV) or "homosexuals" (NIV).53 Movements for justice for gays have led to challenges about such a rendering, and some would contend that Paul is condemning only male prostitution because it brutalizes the active participant as well as victimizing the passive participant. This is highly dubious on several grounds. As indicated above, an attempt to create a parallelism with pornoi, understood as those having sex with female prostitutes, is unlikely. Moreover, the linguistic composition of arsenokoitai lends little support to confining the term to using male prostitutes.54 The components arsen and koimasthai are found in {530} Lv 18:22; Lv 20:13, which forbid lying with a male as with a woman, i.e., having coitus with a male. Surely Paul, whose basic Bible was the LXX, had these passages in mind when he used the compound word to condemn homosexuality.55 The fact that 1 Co 6:9-10 places the reference to arseno-koitai in the context of many other condemned practices hinders efforts to evaluate how seriously he regarded it. His thought is spelled out more clearly in Rm 1:26-27, where he bases himself on God's creation of man and woman for each other, to cleave together as one. Accordingly he denounces as a graphic distortion of God's created order women who have exchanged natural intercourse for that against nature and men who have abandoned natural relations with women and burned with lust for one another.56 Overall, then, the evidence strongly favors the thesis that Paul was condemning not only sexual activity by pederasts but also by homosexuals - indeed any sexual activity outside of marriage between a man and a woman.

All statements by human beings, including those in the Bible, are limited by the worldview of those who uttered them. Our attention has been focused on what Paul was condemning in the 1st century. A different but essential question is how binding the Pauline condemnation is for Christians of today. This goes beyond the issue of "Intro_erim ethics" (p. 509 above). We know a lot more about the physiology and psychology of sexual activity than did Paul. Nevertheless, the fact that in 1 Co 6:16 Paul cites Gn 2:24, "The two will become one flesh," suggests that his condemnation of fornicators and homosexuals in 1 Co 6:9 is rooted in God's having created male and female in the divine image (Gn 1:27) and ordained that they might be united in marriage - the same background cited against divorce by Jesus in Mk 10:7-8. An outlook based on the revelation of God's will in creation itself would not be easily changed. Scholarly discussion of the issue will continue, challenging Paul's outlook on the "unnatural." Nevertheless, in insisting on the sexual limits imposed by the divinely commanded state of marriage between a man and a woman, Paul and indeed, Jesus himself, walking among us in our times, would not be frightened by being considered sexually and politically "incorrect," any more than they minded being considered overly demanding in the Greco-Roman and Jewish world of their times.57

{531}

Charisms at Corinth (1 Co 12 and 14) and Today

In 12:28 we find a list of charisms, divided first into a numbered group of three consisting of apostles, prophets, and teachers; and then into an unnumbered group consisting of acts of power (miracles), the gifts of healings, forms of help or assistance; administrative capabilities (or leadership), and various kinds of tongues.58 This is not a total list, for 12:8-10 also mentions utterance of wisdom, utterance of knowledge, faith, and discernment of spirits, plus a distinction made between tongues and the interpretation of tongues;59 still others appear in Rm 12:6-8. Some who have one charism want another, and in 1Co 12:12 ff. Paul uses the image of the human body and its many members, probably borrowed from popular Stoicism (p. 90 above), to stress that diversity is necessary. Even the less presentable parts have an indispensable role. From 14:1-33 we discern that the gift of speaking in tongues,60 perhaps because it was most visible, was the chief source of strife. Paul critiques the situation in several ways. One needs to interpret the tongues, and consequently an additional gift of interpretation is required (14:13). Compared to tongues, there are more excellent gifts, e.g., prophecy that builds up the church (14:5). Most radically Paul urges seeking after love (agape), which is more important than any charism (13:1-13), whether speaking angelic tongues or prophecy, or miracles. When he has advanced all his arguments, Paul contends that every true prophet and spiritual person will recognize that what he has written is a command of the Lord; and the person who does not recognize that is not to be recognized in the community (14:37-38)! If Paul has to resort to that authoritarian "bottom line," we know we are dealing with a difficult subject.

Although there have always been small churches and even sects of Christians who exulted in charismatic phenomena, in recent years "charismatics" have received more attention and are now found among members of most of the large churches. There is a variety of charisms in these modern experiences, but frequently attention centers on speaking in tongues, "being slain {532} in the spirit," and detecting demons.61 It is generally recognized that charismatic experiences have the power to intensify the religious or spiritual life of people. Yet are charismatics today experiencing what is described in 1 Co 12?

Some remarks are in order: (a) No person reared in the 20th century has the worldview of a person reared in the 1st century, and therefore it is impossible today to know or duplicate exactly what Paul describes, no matter how genuine the self-assurance of the charismatic. On the basic point of the Spirit, for instance, Christians are now shaped by a trinitarian theology worked out in the 4th century; there is no evidence that Paul had such clarity about the personhood of the Spirit, (b) As for speaking in tongues, Paul claims to speak in tongues to a greater degree than those he is addressing at Corinth (14:18). Yet it is not easy to be certain what he means by "tongues." He makes references to speech that requires interpretation; to speech directed to God but not to others, for nobody understands the speakers; to sounds that in themselves are unintelligible; to a gift that builds up the individual rather than the church (14:1-19); and to the tongues of angels (13:1). Writing a few decades later, the author of Acts seems to offer two interpretations of speaking in tongues (2:4): one in which it is unintelligible babbling as if the speakers were drunk (2:13-15), and another in which it is the speaking of foreign languages that one has not learned (2:6-7). Are different understandings of "tongues" what is meant by "various kinds of tongues"? (c) The charisms described by Paul are gifts given freely by God; they do not all seem to involve emotional experience or dramatic behavior. As already indicated, one gift is kyberneseis (administrations, leaderships). Today we may recognize that a person is a gifted administrator and attribute that to God, but normally we do not place such people in the same charismatic category as speakers in tongues. Paul does, (d) Modern appreciation of charisms sometimes neglects the fact that they were very divisive at Corinth. Inevitably, whether a charism or an office is involved, when one Christian claims to have a role others do not have, issues of superiority and envy are introduced. There are NT reflections on the Spirit that almost work against the idea of different charisms. According to Jn 14:15-16 everyone who loves Jesus and keeps the commandments receives the Paraclete Spirit, and there is no suggestion of different gifts or roles. In John's view all are disciples, and that is what is important, (e) Finally, in evaluating modern charismatics, with loyalty to the NT evidence one may rejoice that the church today {533} like the church in Corinth is not lacking in any spiritual gift (1:7). Yet one may challenge those who maintain that someone is not a Christian if that person does not receive a special charism, or maintain that when a charism is received, the possessor is a better Christian than others not thus gifted.

The "Hymn" to Love (1 Co 13)

This chapter contains some of the most beautiful lines ever penned by Paul, whence the designation "Hymn." After the contrast between love and charisms (13:1-3), 13:4-8a personifies love and makes it the subject of sixteen verbs (some of which are translated by predicate adjectives in English). This leads into a contrast between a present marked by charisms in which there is but a poor reflection in a mirror, and a future where we shall see face to face. There faith, hope, and love will remain, "but the greatest of these is love" (13:8b-13).

What is meant by Christian love (agape)! Every NT author does not necessarily have the same understanding of the term, but what follows applies to some of the principal passages. An entree is offered by A. Nygren's famous Agape and Eros (2 vols.; London: SPCK, 1932-37). To spotlight the uniqueness of Christian agape, Nygren contrasted it with both the highest expression of love (eros) among the Pagan philosophers and love described in the OT. The contrast is exaggerated and needs serious qualification; nevertheless, it can be helpful in clarifying what is meant in this chap, of 1 Cor. Nygren described eros as love attracted by the goodness of the object: people reaching out or up for the good they want to possess in order to be more complete.62 In Platonic philosophy this eros would be a motivating factor reaching out for the perfect truth and beauty that exists outside this world. In Aristotelian philosophy eros would involve the material or limited reaching out to be less limited and thus moving up the scale of being. God, in whom there is all perfection, would be the supreme object of eros. Agape, on the other hand, is unmotivated; it confers goodness on the object loved. Thus agape starts with God who needs nothing from creatures but by love brings them into being and ennobles them. In particular, Paul's notion of love is based on the self-giving of Christ, who loved us not because we were good but while we were still sinners (Rm 5:8). As 1 Jn 4:8,10 proclaims: "God is love... In this is love, not that we loved God but that God loved us and sent His Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins." The eloquent personification of love in 1 Co 13:5-8 almost makes love and Christ {534} interchangeable. Given worth (justified, sanctified) by Christ's agape, we become the channel of passing that love on to others whom we love, not evaluating their goodness and without motivation: "Love each other as I have loved you" (Jn 15:12).63

Paul and the Risen Jesus (1 Co 15)

The tradition preserved in 15:3ff. shows that there was in place an early sequence of Jesus' death, burial, resurrection, and appearances - the building blocks of a passion narrative (especially when combined with 11:23 that places the Last Supper on the night before Jesus was given over). It offers an argument for recognizing that a tradition about Jesus' earthly career was developing side by side with Paul's preaching that reports few details about that career. Although this chapter was included in 1 Cor as an argument for the reality of the resurrection of those who have died in Christ, it has become a centerpiece in the argument about the reality of the resurrection of Jesus. In the present form there are two groups of three by whom Jesus "was seen": Cephas (Peter), the Twelve, and more than 500; then James, all the apostles, and "last of all me."64 The concluding reference to himself is extremely important since Paul is the only NT writer who claims personally to have witnessed an appearance of the risen Jesus.65 We may list a number of issues:

(a) Paul places the appearance to himself, even if it was last, on the same level as the appearance to all the other listed witnesses. Acts gives a different picture, for after appearances on earth Jesus ascends into heaven (1:9); con sequently, a light and voice comes to Paul from heaven (Ac 9:3-5; Ac 22:6-8; Ac 26:13-15). Few would give the Lucan picture priority over the Pauline.

(b) Paul employs the verbal sequence died/buried/raised/appeared in 1 Co 15:3-5 and reuses "appeared" (the passive of "to see") three more times in 15:6-8. Nevertheless, some have contended that Paul is not referring to {535} seeing Jesus in a bodily form. Since in Paul's understanding Jesus appeared to more than 500 people at the same time, a purely internal vision seems to be ruled out. Moreover, presumably Paul's experience of the risen Jesus has something to do with his expectations about the raising of the dead in the rest of the chap. There he very clearly talks about a resurrection of the body (even if transformed) and uses the analogy of sowing in the ground and what emerges from it (15:35-37).66

(c) Much has been made of Paul's silence about Jesus' empty tomb as if that silence were contradictory to the Gospel accounts. Yet there is no a priori reason why he had to mention the tomb, and the burial/resurrection sequence virtually presumes that the risen body is no longer where it was buried.

(d) Luke's description of a risen Jesus who speaks of himself as having flesh and bones and who eats (Lk 24:39, 42-43) seems contrary to a Pau line understanding of the risen body as spiritual and not flesh and blood (1 Co 15:44 ,50). Luke (who does not claim to have seen the risen Jesus) may well have had a more concrete, tangible understanding of the risen body (of Jesus) than Paul had (of the risen bodies of Christians). Once again few would give the Lucan picture priority over the Pauline.

Issues and Problems for Reflection

(1) The common view, adopted here, is that 1Co is a unified letter sent at one time. (Hurd, "Good News," discusses the issue thoroughly.) Motifs in the Thanksgiving (1:5-7, e.g., possessing knowledge, not lacking charisms, awaiting the revealing of Jesus Christ) anticipate themes in 1 Co 8:1; 1 Co 12:1; 1 Co 15:23. Yet there is no visible connection between the factions mentioned in 1 Co 1-4 and the corrections issued after 5:1. For example, we get no indication whether members of the Cephas (Peter) or Apollos factions are those who deny that Paul is an apostle (1 Co 9:2). The two occasions of information mentioned under § 4 and § 5 above best explain the disjointed nature of the letter, but leave open different theories of composition. Snyder argues that a letter consisting of chaps. 7-16 was composed by Paul in response to the missive from Corinth mentioned in 1 Co 7:1 (§ 5). Before he could send his letter, he got news via Chloe of a more serious situation created by the factions at Corinth; and so he prefixed chaps 1-6. De Boer favors the opposite order: Paul's letter consisting of chaps. 1-4 was not sent before the newly arrived missive from Corinth (with accompanying reports) required the addition of 5-16. {536}

(2) Paul's description of excommunication in 1 Co 5:4-5 is not very clear except for his insistence that the sinful man had to be expelled from the com munity. We find in Ac 5:1-11 the extirpation of those whose sinful presence would corrupt the community. How a Christian community might deal with someone who had to be corrected is illustrated in Mt 18:15-17. Yet notice that in neither Mt (see Mt 18:21-22) nor 1 Co 5:5 was the expulsion of the sinner the last word; there was still hope for forgiveness or salvation.

(3) We see examples of Paul's understanding of his apostolic authority in 1 Co 5:3-5 (to excommunicate), 1 Co 7:10-16 (to issue a ruling that modifies a ruling of the Lord), and 1 Co 15:9-11 (to be a spokesman along with others of an author itative interpretation of the gospel). An old axiom is that revelation ceased with the death of the last apostle. Not to be taken in a mechanical sense, this was meant to signify that the Christian revelation included not only what Jesus said in his ministry but also the interpretation of Jesus by the apostles, particularly as enshrined in the NT. (See also Ga 1:8; Mt 16:19; Mt 18:18; Jn 20:23.) Yet in modern discussions of disputed issues (particularly of morality), one sometimes gets the impression that if Jesus himself did not affirm something and one must resort to Paul's word, that is less authorita tive. Moreover, although the major Christian churches have resisted the notion of postapostolic new revelation, others who believe in Christ, from Montanus in the 2d century to Joseph Smith in the 19th, have held that new revelation could come through a prophet.

(4) In Ac 16:15,33 we find instances of Paul baptizing immediately those whom he had convinced about Christ; but according to 1 Co 1:14 in a year and a half at Corinth he personally baptized only Crispus (confirming Ac 18:8) and Gaius. Nevertheless Paul considered himself the one father of the Corinthians in Christ through the gospel. How did baptism fit into Paul's missionary enterprise? If he did not baptize most of the Corinthians, who did? Paul speaks of his planting the seed and Apollos watering it (1 Co 3:6). Without any pun, did Apollos do the baptizing in water? This would be inter esting in the light of Ac 18:24-28 where he had not known that there was a baptism beyond JBap's. What theology of baptism would explain separat ing the evangelizer from the baptizer? In 1 Co 6:11 Paul gives the sequence "washed, sanctified, justified" (a rare reference in 1 Cor to justification; see 1 Co 1:30 and 1 Co 4:4), showing that baptism had a centrality. 1 Co 10 compares baptism to Moses' delivering Israel from Egypt in the exodus, and places it in a context that speaks of the eucharist. See also the treatment in Rm 6:1-11.

(5) Paul's attitude in 1 Co 7:1-9 is that he would like all to be like himself, unmarried and abstaining from sex, but the affirmation it is better "to marry {537} rather than to burn,"67 has been the source of much discussion. See also 1 Co 7:28: If you do get married it is not a sin, but married people will have hardships; and 1 Co 7:32-33: The unmarried man can pay attention to the Lord's affairs while the married man pays attention to the affairs of the world and how to please his wife. Granted that these statements are colored by the thought of Christ coming soon, they do not offer an enthusiastic picture of the sanctifying possibilities of married life. In subsequent Christianity the monastic movement for men and women led to the thesis that celibacy for the kingdom of God is better than marriage. On the other hand in Reformation times celibacy was attacked as a distortion of the gospel; and where Protestantism was victorious, priests and nuns were often forced to marry. Today many Catholics and Protestants want to avoid the category of "better" and to recognize that both celibacy and marriage lived in the love of God are noble callings/ choices. Reflection on this issue is profitably augmented by study of Mt 19:10-12 and Ep 5:21-33.

(6) Given Paul's pastoral attitude on eating food sacrificed to idols (chap. 8; p. 520 above), what is so wrong about Cephas' (Peter's) behavior at Anti- och described in Ga 2:llff.? A Jewish Christian, he knew that he was free to eat with Gentile Christians; but when men of James came and objected, he ceased to do so. Paul objected to this behavior as timorous and insincere (even though Barnabas sided with Peter); but in Peter's mind might it not have been pastoral behavior to avoid scandalizing the less enlightened Jew ish Christians? If there were those at Corinth who insisted on exercising freedom and eating what they wanted, might they not have accused Paul of betraying the gospel of freedom by his cautious attitude, even as he accused Peter of this at Antioch?

(7) In 10:1-4 Paul speaks of the ancestral Israelites having been baptized into Moses in the cloud and the sea, and having all eaten the supernatural food and drunk the supernatural drink. The rock in that scene of desert wan dering was Christ. Given the references to the eucharist in 10:14-22, Paul is reflecting on both baptism and the eucharist against an OT background. This is one of our first indications of the close joining of what were to be designated by later Christians as the primary sacraments. How close were they actually associated in early Christian "liturgical" services? The eucha- ristic passage (also 11:27) implies great care about who could participate. Yet 14:22 suggests an assembly where the word was spoken and unbelievers might enter. Were there separate Christian meetings for the eucharistic meal and for proclaiming the word? (Thus, Becker, Paul 252.) {538}

(8) Exacerbated by Reformation disputes, differing church theologies of the eucharist have constituted a very divisive factor in Western Christianity.1Co 10:14-22 and 11:17-34 are extraordinarily important as the only references to the eucharist in the Pauline letters and also the oldest preserved written eucharistic testimony.68 Comparison of 11:23-25 and Lk 22:19-20 on the one hand with Mk 14:22-24 and Mt 26:26-28 on the other hand suggests at least two different preserved forms of the eucharistic words of Jesus - perhaps three if Jn 6:51 is brought in. (Paul and Luke may be giving us the form in use at the church of Antioch.) It is sobering to reflect that if there had not been abuses at Corinth, Paul would never have mentioned the eucharist; and certainly many scholars would be arguing that there was no eucharist in the Pauline churches on the grounds that he could not have written so much and been accidentally silent about it. Also, since the second passage mentions divisions over eucharistic practice and understanding at Corinth five years after conversion, we are reminded how quickly the eucharist became a source of contention! A divisive issue among Christian churches today is whether there is a sacrificial aspect in the eucharistic offering. Another divisive issue concerns real presence: Is the communicant truly eating the body and drinking the blood of the Lord? Granted that the Roman Catholic-Protestant debates certainly go beyond Paul's thought, reflection on 1Co 10:14-22 and 11:27-29 contributes to the discussion, along with Jn 6:51-64. Those passages contain verses that have a sacrificial context and verses that point to realism but also the need for faith.