The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown (107 page)

⁴⁶
F. W. Hughes,
Early Christian Rhetoric and 2 Thessalonians
, JSNTSup 30 (Sheffield: JSOT, 1989), 55; Jewett,
Thessalonian Correspondence
, 82; G. A. Kennedy,
New Testament Tnterpretation Through Rhetorical Criticism
(Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, 1984), 144; Wanamaker,
Thessalonians
, 48.

⁴⁷
Jewett,
Thessalonian Correspondence
, 82—84.

⁴⁸
For a good introduction to the basic format of Paul's letters, see P. T. O'Brien, “Letters, Letter Forms,” in
Dictionary of Paul and His Letters
, 550—53.

⁴⁹
Jewett,
Thessalonian Correspondence
, 87.

⁵⁰
For the view that divine judgment consists of confrontation with Christ's glorious presence rather than separation from it, see C. L. Quarles, “The
Apo
of 2 Thessalonians 1:9 and the Nature of Eternal Punishment,”
WTJ 59
(1997): 201—11.

⁵¹
See the discussion of the man of lawlessness and the notetitle1 on the “one who restrains” in the Theological Themes section below.

⁵²
E.g., G. K. Beale,
1—2 Thessalonians
(Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2003), 136—38; Wanamaker,
Thessalonians
, 170-71; and Marshall,
Thessalonians, 125-27.

⁵³
E.g., Bruce,
Thessalonians
, 102—3; and Marshall,
Thessalonians
, 130—31; see J. Chrysostom,
Homilies on 1 Thessalonians
8, in P. Schaff, ed.,
Saint Chrysostom: Homilies on Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Thessalonians, Timothy, Titus, and Philemon
, vol. 13 of
A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956), 554-61.

⁵⁴
Wanamaker,
Thessalonians
, 248.

⁵⁵
Bruce,
Thessalonians
, 169. The symbolic view is pressed further by Marshall,
Thessalonians
, 191—92.

⁵⁶
R. L. Thomas, “2 Thessalonians,” EBC 11 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978), 322; and apparently Martin,
1, 2 Thessalonians
, 236—37.

⁵⁷
See Beale,
Thessalonians
, 136; Bruce,
Thessalonians
, 163;Wilkins,
Thessalonians
, 238—39; R. Gundry,
First the Antichrist
(Grand Rapids: Baker, 1997); G. E. Ladd,
The Blessed Hope: A Biblical Study of the Second Advent and the Rapture
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1956).

⁵⁸
T. R. Schreiner,
Paul, Apostle of God's Glory in Christ: A Pauline Theology
(Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2001), 460—61.

⁵⁹
Marshall,
Thessalonians
, 131.

⁶⁰
Quarles,
“The Apo
of 2 Thessalonians 1:9,” 201-11.

⁶¹
By applying this text about the coming of Yahweh to describe the coming of Jesus, Paul identified Jesus as Yahweh and clearly expressed the doctrine of Jesus' deity.

⁶²
Wanamaker,
Thessalonians
, 227; cf. Marshall,
Thessalonians
, 177.

⁶³
Cf. the section above, “Something to Think About: How Is Your Work Ethic?”

CHAPTER 12

CORE KNOWLEDGE

Basic Knowledge:
Students should know the key facts of 1 and 2 Corinthians. With regard to history, students should be able to identify the author, date, provenance, destination, and purpose for each book. With regard to literature, they should be able to provide a basic outline of each book and identify core elements of the book's content found in the Unit-by-Unit discussion. With regard to theology, students should be able to identify the major theological themes in 1 and 2 Corinthians.

Intermediate Knowledge:
In addition to mastery of the core content identified in Basic Knowledge above, students should be able to present the arguments for historical, literary, and theological conclusions. With regard to history, students should be able to discuss the evidence for Paul's authorship, date, provenance, destination, and purpose. With regard to literature, they should be able to provide a detailed outline of the book. With regard to theology, students should be able to discuss the major theological themes in 1 and 2 Corinthians and the ways in which they uniquely contribute to the NT canon.

Advanced Knowledge:
In addition to mastery of the core content identified in Basic Knowledge and beyond the Intermediate Knowledge noted above, students should be able
to assess the literary integrity and unity of 2 Corinthians in relation to interpolation theories. In addition, students should be able to discuss the theories concerning the identity of Paul's opponents in 2 Corinthians.

Map 12.1: Provenance and Destination of 1–2 Corinthians

KEY FACTS

KEY FACTS

INTRODUCTION

P
AUL'S LETTERS TO the church at Corinth are among the most theologically rich and most practically helpful books in the NT. They are most likely next in chronological sequence after Galatians and the Thessalonian letters. In his Corinthian correspondence Paul addressed numerous problems in a church plagued by many troubles. Paul's response to these problems applies his thoughtful theology to very practical issues and demonstrates that theology for Paul was not static. It was dynamic and made a practical difference in daily living. The Corinthian letters show Paul's remarkable integration of faith and practice.

First Corinthians contains Paul's most extensive discussion of topics such as Christian unity, Christian morality, the ordinances of the church, spiritual gifts, and the resurrection of believers. It challenges the development of personality cliques in the church, guides church leaders in the exercise of church discipline, and explains ways to conduct worship decently and in order. It also addresses issues of importance in contemporary society such as the abiding distinction between the genders and the limits of personal freedom.

Although 2 Corinthians is perhaps the most difficult letter of Paul in many ways, its contribution to the NT is considerable as well. The letter is invaluable in guiding interpreters to understand Paul's theology of the new covenant that forms the foundation for much of his thought. The letter also guides students of the Bible in constructing a theology
of suffering like no other NT book. Just as importantly, the Corinthian letters, especially 2 Corinthians, aid in developing a theology of ministry that emphasizes compassion, sacrifice, humility, and dependence on God. One never peers as deeply into the heart of the apostle as one does when scouring the pages of this letter.
¹

In an era in which spiritual leaders are being turned into celebrities and humility is viewed as an undesirable trait, 2 Corinthians may be more important than ever.
²
Perhaps more than any other NT document, 2 Corinthians calls the church to repent of making superapostles out of jars of clay, eschewing suffering, depending on mere human resources, veiling the glory of God, and depreciating divine grace. As C. K. Barrett noted, “Writing 2 Corinthians must have come near to breaking Paul, and…a church that is prepared to read it with him, and understand it, may find itself broken too.”
³

Paul's response to the Corinthians’ problems offers modern students of the NT a powerful guide for addressing the problems of the local church today. But attempting to understand these letters and to mine the principles which are so important to the contemporary church is not for the lazy reader. The exegesis and application of the Corinthian letters demand hard work and serious study.
⁴
This chapter is designed to be a first step in the difficult but rewarding study of the Corinthian letters.

HISTORY

Author

1
Corinthians
Paul's authorship of 1 Corinthians is so widely accepted that some prominent commentaries on the letter do not even treat the issue of authorship.
⁵
The ancient external evidence for the authenticity of the letter is also compelling. Clement of Rome quoted from 1 Corinthians and ascribed the quote to “the epistle of the blessed apostle Paul” around the year 96. He did so, remarkably, in a letter also addressed to the church at Corinth.
⁶
There are also frequent echoes of 1 Corinthians in the letters of Ignatius that were composed prior to 110.
⁷

Some scholars have suggested that although 1 Corinthians was written by Paul, portions of the letter as it is presently known were non-Pauline interpolations. Weiss argued that 1 Cor 1:2b “with all those in every place who call on the name of Jesus Christ our
Lord—theirs and ours” was added by a later editor who wanted to give the letter universal application.
⁸
Others have suggested that the prohibition of women speaking in church in 1 Cor 14:34b—35 is a non-Pauline gloss added by a Jewish Christian.
⁹
But such theories have failed to convince most interpreters since the suspected texts are present in all extant manuscripts of 1 Corinthians. Moreover, objections to the authenticity of 1 Cor 14:34b-35 seem to be driven largely by modern sensitivity to gender issues.

Since H. Hagge first raised questions about the integrity of 1 Corinthians in 1876, dozens of scholars have suggested that 1 Corinthians is a composite letter in which portions of other Pauline correspondence have been inserted into another letter. Since the Corinthian letters clearly refer to at least four letters Paul sent to Corinth, some interpreters suggested that the lack of an orderly arrangement of the letter and tensions between sections of the letter were best explained by regarding 1 Corinthians as a pastiche of Pauline fragments.
¹⁰

Although many different proposals for reconstructing the original documents assembled by the alleged editor of 1 Corinthians have been and continue to be set forth, no proposal has won the favor of NT scholars. Most recognize that the fragmentary nature of the letter is due largely to the fact that Paul's letter responds point by point to issues raised by oral reports and a letter from Corinth. Moreover, good exegetical solutions exist for supposed tensions within the book without resorting to a composite document theory. Finally, changes in tone throughout the letter are probably the result of Paul's writing the letter over a period of time during which he received new information regarding the state of the Corinthian church.
¹¹

2 Corinthians
Paul's authorship of 2 Corinthians has not been seriously contested. The external attestation of 2 Corinthians is not as strong as that for 1 Corinthians. Echoes of 2 Corinthians may appear in the letters of Ignatius (prior to 110) and the
Epistle of Barnabas
(c. 135).
¹²
But the possible parallels are not close enough to demonstrate dependence on 2 Corinthians.
¹³
Polycarp's letter to the Philippians almost certainly contains a loose paraphrase of 2 Cor 5:10, and other statements in the letter imply Polycarp's
familiarity with 2 Corinthians.
¹⁴
Polycarp wrote this letter some time near the death of Ignatius, which is typically dated during the reign of Trajan (98—117).
¹⁵
Thus Polycarp showed an awareness of the existence and authority of 2 Corinthians in the early second century.
¹⁶
According to Tertullian (c. 160-225;
Against Marcion
5.11-12), Marcion also included 2 Corinthians in his canon in the same general time period. By the late second century, 2 Corinthians was listed in the Muratorian Canon (c. later second century) and widely quoted and ascribed to Paul. The weaker external attestation for 2 Corinthians is not sufficient to raise suspicions regarding its authenticity. The letter is so thoroughly Pauline in form, style, and content that Paul's authorship of 2 Corinthians is practically indisputable.