_fol._79v_1_Cor_2,_11–3,_5.jpg)
Content
Some time before 2 Corinthians was written, Paul paid the church at Corinth a second visit to check some rising disorder, and wrote them a letter, now lost. The church had also been visited by Apollos, perhaps by Peter, and by some Jewish Christians who brought with them letters of commendation from Jerusalem.
Paul wrote 1 Corinthians letter to correct what he saw as erroneous views in the Corinthian church. Several sources informed Paul of conflicts within the church at Corinth: Apollos, a letter from the Corinthians, "those of Chloe", and finally Stephanas and his two friends who had visited Paul. Paul then wrote this letter to the Corinthians, urging uniformity of belief ("that ye all speak the same thing and that there be no divisions among you", 1:10) and expounding Christian doctrine. Titus and a brother whose name is not given were probably the bearers of the letter to the church at Corinth.
In general, divisions within the church at Corinth seem to be a problem, and Paul makes it a point to mention these conflicts in the beginning. Specifically, pagan roots still hold sway within their community. Paul wants to bring them back to what he sees as correct doctrine, stating that God has given him the opportunity to be a "skilled master builder" to lay the foundation and let others build upon it.
contains a notable condemnation of idolatry, thievery, drunkenness, slandering, swindling, adultery, and other acts the authors consider sexually immoral.
The majority of early manuscripts end chapter 6 with the words . The Textus Receptus adds , which the New King James Version translates as "and in your spirit, which are (i.e. body and spirit) God's". J. J. Lias, in the Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, notes that "these words are not found in many of the best MSS. and versions, and they somewhat weaken the force of the argument, which is intended to assert the dignity of the body. They were perhaps inserted by some who, missing the point of the Apostle's argument, thought that the worship of the spirit was unduly passed over."
Later, Paul wrote about immorality in Corinth by discussing an immoral brother, how to resolve personal disputes, and sexual purity. Regarding marriage, Paul states that it is better for Christians to remain unmarried, but that if they lacked self-control, it is better to marry than "burn" (πυροῦσθαι). The epistle may include marriage as an apostolic practice in , "Do we not have the right to be accompanied by a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas (Peter)?" (In the last case, the letter concurs with Matthew , which mentions Peter having a mother-in-law and thus, by inference, a wife.) However, the Greek word for 'wife' is the same word for 'woman'. The Early Church Fathers, including Tertullian, Jerome, and Augustine state the Greek word is ambiguous and the women in were women ministering to the Apostles as women ministered to Christ, and were not wives, and assert they left their "offices of marriage" to follow Christ. Paul also argues that married people must please their spouses, just as every Christian must please God.
Throughout the letter, Paul presents issues that are troubling the community in Corinth and offers ways to resolve them. Paul states that this letter serves to "admonish" them as beloved children. They are expected to become imitators of Jesus and follow the ways in Christ as he, Paul, teaches in all his churches.
Paul's closing remarks in his letters usually contain his intentions and efforts to improve the community. He would first conclude with his paraenesis and wish the community peace by including a prayer request, greet them with his name and his friends with a holy kiss, and offer final grace and benediction:
This epistle contains some well-known phrases, including: "all things to all men", "through a glass, darkly", and:
"Through a glass, darkly"
contains the phrase , which was translated in the 1560 Geneva Bible as "For now we see through a glass darkly" (without a comma). This wording was used in the 1611 KJV, which added a comma before "darkly". This passage has inspired the titles of many works, with and without the comma.
The Greek word (genitive; nominative: ), here translated "glass", is ambiguous, possibly referring to a mirror or a lens. Influenced by Strong's Concordance, many modern translations conclude that this word refers specifically to a mirror. Example English language translations include:
- "Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror" (New International Version)
- "What we see now is like a dim image in a mirror" (Good News Bible)
Paul's usage is in keeping with rabbinic use of the term , a borrowing from the Latin specularia. This has the same ambiguous meaning, although Adam Clarke concluded that it was a reference to specularibus lapidibus, clear polished stones used as lenses or windows. One way to preserve this ambiguity is to use the English cognate, speculum. Rabbi Judah ben Ilai (2nd century) was quoted as saying "All the prophets had a vision of God as He appeared through nine specula" while "Moses saw God through one speculum." The Babylonian Talmud states similarly "All the prophets gazed through a speculum that does not shine, while Moses our teacher gazed through a speculum that shines."
Women must remain silent
The letter is also notable for its discussion of Paul's view of the role of women the church. In , it is stated that women must remain silent in the churches, and yet in it states they have a role of prophecy and apparently speaking tongues in churches. Many theories have emerged attempting to reconcile these two passages.
Interpolation Theories
Many scholars believe that verses are an interpolation. The passage interrupts the flow of Paul's argument; it follows language from the First Epistle to Timothy, which was probably not written by Paul; it contradicts Paul's neutral or positive mention of women prophesying, praying, and taking other speaking and leadership roles in the church; the passage is alternatively found at different locations in some manuscripts, which may indicate it was originally inserted as a marginal note and then unstably inserted into the text itself. Moreover, some manuscripts give evidence of a prior record of its absence from the text.
Historic Theories
If verses are not interpolation, certain scholars resolve the tension between these texts by positing that wives were either contesting their husband's inspired speeches at church, or the wives/women were chatting and asking questions in a disorderly manner when others were giving inspired utterances. Their silence was unique to the particular situation in the Corinthian gatherings at that time, and on this reading, Paul did not intend his words to be universalized for all women of all churches of all eras.
Quotation-Refutation Theories
Other scholars including Joseph Fitzmyer suggest that in verses , Paul may be quoting the position of some native Corinthian Christians regarding women who have been speaking out in cultic assemblies in order that he can then argue against it. According to Craig Keener, "When Paul suggests that husbands should teach their wives at home, his point is not to belittle women's ability to learn. To the contrary, Paul is advocating the most progressive view of his day: despite the possibility that she is less educated than himself, the husband should recognize his wife's intellectual capability and therefore make himself responsible for her education..."
Kirk MacGregor believes Paul may be quoting the Corinthian men's prohibition of women speaking in assemblies in order to rebuke it. He argues the quotation starts at verse b with the adverb "As" Ὡς () and ends with verse , with Paul's rebuke starting at verse with "Or" ἢ (). He states this conjunction is used in 1 Cor (, , , ) to argue against the Corinthians' position and in 1 Cor (, ) to argue against a Corinthian practice. He also references other times in this first epistle where Paul quotes the Corinthians. In “All things are permitted for me,” (NRSVue) twice. In “It is good for a man not to touch a woman.” (NRSVue). In "all of us possess knowledge." (NRSVue). In "All things are permitted," (NRSVue) twice. In (NRSVue) the sentence is as such: "Or" ἢ () "are you" ὑμᾶς () "the only [ones]" μόνους (), ending with an accusative masculine plural adjective. Due to Koine Greek being an inflected language, the gender of each Greek adjective must agree grammatically with the gender of the word that it's modifying. MacGregor outlines the lack of the feminine plural "monas" as further evidence towards his argument. He posits that Paul did not explicitly identify the false statement by the Corinthians due to the letter being specifically directed to them and that they already knew their own belief in this.
Head covering
Main article: Christian headcovering
contains an admonishment that Christian women cover their hair while praying and that Christian men leave their heads uncovered while praying. These practices were countercultural; the surrounding pagan Greek women prayed unveiled and Jewish men prayed with their heads covered.
The King James Version of reads "For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels," where "power" represents the Greek word exousia. Exousia is the subject of significant debate as to how it should best be translated. Other versions translate it as "authority". In many early biblical manuscripts (such as certain Vulgate, Coptic, and Armenian manuscripts), it is rendered with the word "veil" () rather than the word "authority" (); the Revised Standard Version reflects this, displaying as follows: "That is why a woman ought to have a veil on her head, because of the angels." Similarly, a scholarly footnote in the New American Bible notes that presence of the word "authority (grc) may possibly be due to mistranslation of an Aramaic word for veil". This mistranslation may be due to "the fact that in Aramaic the roots of the word power and veil are spelled the same." The last-known living connection to the apostles, Irenaeus, penned verse 10 using the word "veil" () instead of "authority" () in Against Heresies, as did other Church Fathers in their writings, including Hippolytus, Origen, Chrysostom, Jerome, Epiphanius, Augustine, and Bede.
Scholars have propounded various meanings of the phrase "because of the angels" in v. 10. According to Dale Martin, Paul is concerned that angels may look lustfully at beautiful women, as the "sons of God" in Genesis 6 apparently did. Noting the similarity between the Greek word translated "veil" and the Greek word for a seal or cork of a wine jug, Martin theorizes that the veil acted not only to conceal the beauty of a woman's hair, but also as a symbolic protective barrier that "sealed" the woman against the influence of fallen angels. Other scholars, such as Joseph Fitzmyer, believe the angels spoken of here are not fallen angels looking lustfully at women, but good angels who watch over church services. Notably, the author of Hebrews mentions "entertaining angels" and evidence from the Dead Sea Scrolls suggests some Second Temple era Jews believed angels attended synagogue services. According to this view, Paul's concern is not that an angel looks lustfully, but simply that the appearance of an inappropriately dressed women might offend the heavenly guardians. A third interpretation comes from Bruce Winter, who theorizes that the "angels" spoken of are not heavenly beings at all, but simply human visitors. Winter notes that the Greek word translated "angels" literally means "messengers" and could refer to a visitor carrying a letter from afar, possibly even the epistle itself. In this view, Paul is concerned that if a visitor to a church service sees a married woman with her head uncovered, he may judge that woman to be promiscuous. Thus, Paul seeks to protect the church community's honor by ensuring that all members appear above reproach.
The head covering ordinance continued to be handed down after the apostolic era to the next generations of Christians; writing 150 years after Paul, the early Christian apologist Tertullian stated that the women of the church in Corinthboth virgins and marriedpracticed veiling, given that Paul the Apostle delivered the teaching to them: "the Corinthians themselves understood him in this manner. In fact, at this very day, the Corinthians do veil their virgins. What the apostles taught, their disciples approve." From the period of the early Church to the late modern period, 1 Corinthians 11 was understood by many to enjoin the wearing of the headcovering throughout the daya practice that has since waned in Western Europe but has continued in certain parts of the world, such as in the Middle East, Eastern Europe, Northern Africa and the Indian subcontinent, as well as everywhere by Conservative Anabaptists (such as the Conservative Mennonite Churches and the Dunkard Brethren Church), who count veiling as being one of the ordinances of the Church. The early Church Father John Chrysostom explicates that 1 Corinthians 11 enjoins the continual wearing the headcovering by referencing Paul the Apostle's view that being shaven is always dishonourable and his pointing to the angels.
''Agape''
Main article: Agape
Chapter 13 of 1 Corinthians is one of many definitional sources for the original Greek word . In the original Greek, the word is used throughout chapter 13. This is translated into English as "charity" in the King James version; but the word "love" is preferred by most other translations, both earlier and more recent.
contains a condemnation of what the authors consider inappropriate behavior at Corinthian gatherings that appeared to be agape feasts. Creed
Resurrection
Main article: Resurrection of Jesus, Salvation in Christianity
After discussing his views on worshipping idols, Paul ends the letter with his views on resurrection and the Resurrection of Jesus.
The text of First Corinthians has been interpreted as evidence of existing dualistic beliefs among the Corinthians. Scholars point to to :
Based on interpretations of the text, it appears that Corinthians did not believe that the soul would return to its physical prison after death. Paul is critical of the Corinthian denial of the resurrection of the dead in asking: "Now if Christ is proclaimed as raised from the dead, how can some of you say there is no resurrection of the dead? " Richard Horsley has argued that use of contrasting terms like corruption/incorruption in a polemic about resurrection supports a theory that Paul is using the "language of the Corinthians" in these verses. Multiple academic theories have been proposed for the source of this language including Greek philosophical influence, Gnosticism and the teachings of Philo of Alexandria.
1 Corinthians 15:3–7Most scholars agree that Paul was reinforcing earlier tradition about resurrection noting that he describes the kerygma as "received".{{efn|Early kerygma:
- Neufeld, The Earliest Christian Confessions (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964) p. 47;
- Reginald Fuller, The Formation of the Resurrection Narratives (New York: Macmillan, 1971) p. 10 ()
- Wolfhart Pannenberg, Jesus – God and Man translated Lewis Wilkins and Duane Pribe (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968) p. 90 ();
- Oscar Cullmann, The Early Church: Studies in Early Christian History and Theology, ed. A. J. B. Higgins (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1966) p. 64;
- Hans Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians, translated James W. Leitch (Philadelphia: Fortress 1975) p. 251 ();
- Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament vol. 1 pp. 45, 80–82, 293;
- R. E. Brown, The Virginal Conception and Bodily Resurrection of Jesus (New York: Paulist Press, 1973) pp. 81, 92 ();
- Goulder, Michael, The Baseless Fabric of a Vision (as quoted in Gavin D'Costa's Resurrection Reconsidered), p. 48, 1996}}
Paul represents the kerygma to the Corinthians "as a sacred tradition" that Christ was "raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures". James P. Ware notes that the original Greek word ἐγείρω, translated as "raised", always refers to the reanimation of the corpse when used with reference to the dead. He states that "[i]t is thus beyond doubt that the apostolic formula of 1 Cor 15 affirms that Jesus arose on the third day in his crucified body, leaving behind an empty tomb."
Kirk MacGregor notes the textual evidence from the kerygma as stated in is cited by modern scholars as evidence "that Jesus' earliest disciples believed in a spiritual resurrection which did not necessarily vacate his tomb". Dale Moody says the tradition of the appearances of the resurrected Christ and the tradition of the empty tomb "remain separate in the oldest strata of tradition".
Geza Vermes states that the words of Paul are "a tradition he has inherited from his seniors in the faith concerning the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus". The kerygma was possibly transmitted from the Jerusalem apostolic community{{efn|name="ancientcreed"|Ancient creed:
- Wolfhart Pannenberg, Jesus – God and Man translated Lewis Wilkins and Duane Pribe (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968) p. 90;
- Oscar Cullmann, The Early church: Studies in Early Christian History and Theology, ed. A. J. B. Higgins (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1966) p. 66;
- R. E. Brown, The Virginal Conception and Bodily Resurrection of Jesus (New York: Paulist Press, 1973) p. 81;
- Thomas Sheehan, First Coming: How the Kingdom of God Became Christianity (New York: Random House, 1986) pp. 110, 118;
- Ulrich Wilckens, Resurrection translated A. M. Stewart (Edinburgh: Saint Andrew, 1977) p. 2}} though the core formula may have originated in Damascus.
It may be one of the earliest kerygmas about Jesus' death and resurrection, though it is also possible that Paul himself joined the various statements, as proposed by Urich Wilckens. It is also possible that "he appeared" was not specified in the core formula, and that the specific appearances are additions. According to Hannack, line b- form the original core, while line and line contain competing statements from two different factions. Prive also argues that line and line reflect the tensions between Petrus and James.
The kerygma has often been dated to no more than five years after Jesus' death by Biblical scholars. Bart Ehrman dissents, saying that "Among scholars I personally know, except for evangelicals, I don't now[sic] anyone who thinks this at all." Gerd Lüdemann however, maintains that "the elements in the tradition are to be dated to the first two years after the crucifixion of Jesus[...] not later than three years".
According to Gary R. Habermas, in ", Paul records an ancient oral tradition(s) that summarizes the content of the Christian gospel." N.T Wright describes it as "the very early tradition that was common to all Christians".
In dissent from the majority view, Robert M. Price, Hermann Detering, John V. M. Sturdy, and David Oliver Smith have each argued that is a later interpolation. According to Price, the text is not an early Christian creed written within five years of Jesus' death, nor did Paul write these verses. In his assessment, this was an Interpolation possibly dating to the beginning of the 2nd century. Price states that "The pair of words in verse a, "received / delivered" (paralambanein / paradidonai) is, as has often been pointed out, technical language for the handing on of rabbinical tradition", so it would contradict Paul's account of his conversion given in , which explicitly says that he had been taught the gospel of Christ by Jesus himself, not by any other man.
closes with an account of the nature of the resurrection, claiming that in the Last Judgement the dead will be raised and both the living and the dead transformed into "spiritual bodies" ().
Psalm 8 reference
refers to . also refers to this verse of .
Evil company corrupts good habits
contains the aphorism "evil company corrupts good habits", from classical Greek literature. According to the church historian Socrates of Constantinople it is taken from a Greek tragedy of Euripides, but modern scholarship, following Jerome, attributes it to the comedy grc by Menander, or Menander quoting Euripides. Hans Conzelmann remarks that the quotation was widely known.
Baptism of the dead
argues it would be pointless to baptise the dead if people are not raised from the dead. This verse suggests that there existed a practice at Corinth whereby a living person would be baptized in the stead of some convert who had recently died. Teignmouth Shore, writing in Ellicott's Commentary for Modern Readers, notes that among the "numerous and ingenious conjectures" about this passage, the only tenable interpretation is that there existed a practice of baptising a living person to substitute those who had died before that sacrament could have been administered in Corinth, as also existed among the Marcionites in the second century, or still earlier than that, among a sect called "the Corinthians". The Jerusalem Bible states that "What this practice was is unknown. Paul does not say if he approved of it or not: he uses it merely for an ad hominem argument".
The Latter Day Saint movement interprets this passage to support the practice of baptism for the dead. This principle of vicarious work for the dead is an important work of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the dispensation of the fulness of times. This interpretation is rejected by other Christian denominations.{{Citation | access-date = July 3, 2016 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20160819061025/http://www.umc.org/what-we-believe/receive-guidelines-for-ministering-to-mormons-who-seek-to-become-united-met | access-date = July 3, 2016 | archive-date = 2016-08-19