Читать книгу 1 Corinthians - B. J. Oropeza - Страница 8

Paul’s transformation from a Pharisee and persecutor of Christ’s followers took place only several years after Christ’s crucifixion.1 Once established in Antioch, he became an apostle to the Gentiles travelling to different cities proclaiming the gospel of Christ. It was during his so-called second missionary journey that he first evangelized Corinth, according to Acts 18:1–20.2 If his stay in Corinth corresponds with Gallio’s proconsulship of the region as portrayed in Acts, he was there somewhere between the years of 50–52 CE.3 A few years later he stayed in Ephesus and there wrote 1 Corinthians (see 1 Cor 15:32; 16:8–9), having already sent them at least one previous letter now lost to us (5:9). The first canonical letter was written about 54 or 55 CE.4 We will address issues surrounding Paul and the Corinthians, and the occasion and purpose for this letter, but first some information about ancient Corinth and its myths is in order.

Corinth: Its People and Myths

Corinth acquired the reputation of wealth and accessibility. It was situated strategically near the Isthmus of the Peloponnesus and had ports at Cenchreae and Lechaeum along with the diolkos road that enabled ships prior to Paul’s day to pass from the Aegean to Ionian Sea. Among other things, the city was a center for commerce, high-quality bronze, and state-of-the-art ships.5 The Corinthians demonstrated their military power when, together with Athenians and Spartans, they defended Greece against Persia (5th c. BCE). As a prime mover of the Peloponnesian War (431–404 BCE), they stirred up alliances which eventually led to Athen’s demise, and in the Corinthian War that followed they allied with other Greek cities against Sparta’s expansions. They fought against Philip II of Macedon at Chaeronea, and later joined the Achaean League, which eventually led to their disaster when opposing Rome. The Roman general, Lucius Mummius, set the city aflame, put to death many of its men, and sold its women and children into slavery (146 BCE).6

Bravery, hardship, and heroism in the Corinthian battles were doubtless retold by its citizens, things that stand in tension with characterizations of Corinth as a place of leisure and sexual license. The Acrocorinth’s alleged thousand sacred prostitutes devoted to Aphrodite, goddess of love (Strabo Geogr. 8.6.20c), at best seems exaggerated since sacred prostitution was not customarily a Greek practice.7 Aphrodite’s legendary origin from the foam of the sea, where the god Chronos had cut off the genitals of his father Ouranus (Hesiod Theog. 188–206), casts her in sensual light. But she also represented beauty, fruitfulness, safe seafaring, and protector of the Corinthians.8 Perhaps in this last role the women of Corinth would climb the Acrocorinth; they begged for “a great and terrifying divine force to inspire their warriors to overwhelm the horrifying destructive power of war.”9 Nevertheless, Corinth did have a licentious reputation. Plutarch mentions an “army of harlots” in the Acrocorinth (Amatorius 21[767F]), Aristophanes uses the term korinthiazesthai to refer to practicing sexual immorality (Frag. 354), and Plato seems to equate Corinthian women with sexual promiscuity (Rep. 404D). Although these words come from outsiders and perhaps promote Athenian propaganda,10 they are nonetheless complementary with what we find in 1 Corinthians. Here more than any of his other letters, Paul tries to correct the sexual misconduct of congregation members, including their affairs with prostitutes (1 Cor 5–7; cf. 10:8; 2 Cor 12:21).

Roman Corinth

After Mummius’s conflagration of Corinth, some structures and a small population of primarily lower class Greeks remained.11 Under Julius Caesar it was repopulated in 44 BCE as a Roman colony. Surviving Greek buildings were reused, such as the South Stoa, the theatre, the Peirene and Glauke fountains, and the Isthmian games were reinstated.12 According to Benjamin Millis, the population included Greek freedman, provincials, and Roman freeborn; the amount of veterans was insignificant. The repopulated city was neither completely Greek nor Roman but a hybrid culture.13 It was comprised of both colonist citizens and foreigners, and its governance, typical of Roman colonial cities, consisted of two magistrates (duoviri) who appointed councilors (decuriones). In addition, two aediles were in charge of edifices, street maintenance, and commercial affairs. The most honored position was the agonothetes, the president over the games.14 Corinth prospered especially as a service city that provided cultural, educational, religious, and judicial activities.15 Cicero called this large, thriving city the “light of all Greece” (Leg. man. 5) and Diodorus Siculus the “bright star of Hellas” (Bib. hist. 32.27.1).

Its civic reputation, along with many erections and inscriptions attesting to human pride, may warrant Corinth as “a city where public boasting and self-promotion had become an art form.”16 Although the lingua franca of the time was Greek, and Latin was the elite language of Rome, the majority of inscriptions in Corinth are written in Latin prior to the second century CE.17 This doubtless suggests the influence of both Roman and high society in Corinth. While Roman ideology was surely pervasive in Corinth, legends attached to art and ancient structures provided its inhabitants with a sense of continuity with the older Greek city. Elite magistrates with Greek names uncovered in the city suggest not only that Greeks were becoming more like Romans, but that “Corinth was becoming more Greek.”18

Unpoliced private cults flourished in the area enabling Greek and foreign religions to continue without harassment.19 Some of the religious sites in or near the city included those venerating Aphrodite, Poseidon, Apollo, Demeter and Kore, and Asclepius. The various deities associated with the twenty-six sacred locations in Corinth described by Pausanius complement Paul’s words to the Corinthians that there are “gods many and lords many” (1 Cor 8:5).20 The imperial cult was also strongly present with Julio-Claudian portraits on the east side of the forum, an altar to Divus (divine) Julius Caesar, and a statue of Divus Augustus Caesar in the middle of the forum.21 Acts 18:4 also locates a Jewish synagogue in the city during Paul’s visit. An inscription identifying the “Synagogue of the Hebrews” was excavated in the city (CIJ I§718). Certain scholars have dated it in a time frame compatible with Acts, but its origin may be much later.22 Philo, in any case, confirms a Jewish community living in first-century Corinth (Legat. 281).

Corinthian Mythology

Although the Corinthians boasted of their origin in the hero Corinthus as the son of Zeus, other Greeks did not believe this familial tie.23 Ephyra, daughter of the sea Titan, Oceanus, was said to dwell first in Corinth. Some prominent mythological stories about Corinthians are as follows.

The crafty king Sisyphus was one of Corinth’s earliest rulers. Zeus punishes him for exposing one of Zeus’s illicit affairs. He sends Thanatos (death) to take Sisyphus’s life, but the king binds up this deity until Ares, god of war, frees Thanatos so that he could accomplish his mission. The dead Sisyphus then tricks Hades, god of the underworld, into letting him return to life temporarily so that he could arrange his own funeral proceedings. But he never returns to Hades and lives to a ripe old age. After he dies again, Sisyphus’s punishment is to roll a boulder perpetually up a hill only to have it roll back down again once he gets near the top. A temple was built for him on the Acrocorinth.24

Another myth centers on a boy named Melikertes whom Sisyphus finds; he was brought to shore by a dolphin, a scene minted on Corinthian tessera coins.25 Sisyphus buries him on the Isthmus and in his honor establishes the Isthmian games (Pausanius Descr. 2.1.3). In one version of the story, Melikertes’s mother Ino jumps into the sea with him to escape a deadly pursuit. She becomes the goddess Leukothea and he Palaimon, a marine god. At the games his funerary rites seem to be reenacted, and Roman colonists built a sanctuary for him.26

The hero Bellerophon, grandson of Sisyphus, tames the winged horse Pegasus after consulting a wise seer in Corinth who has him seek Athena at her temple for assistance. When he accidentally kills his brother, he stays in Argos with king Proetus and rejects queen Anteia’s amorous advances. She then accuses him of attempted rape. The king sends him away with a sealed letter to king Iobates of Lycia requesting to kill him. This king refuses; he opens the letter after entertaining his guest and he fears such an act as a host would spark Zeus’s wrath. Instead, he sends Bellerophon to do dangerous tasks, one of which is to kill Chimaera the monstrous lion-goat-serpent, which he succeeds in doing with Pegasus’s help. In later years he becomes arrogant, attempting to ride Pegasus up to Olympus to live among the immortals, but Pegasus throws off his rider, and Bellerophon becomes hated by the gods.27 The fountain-spring of Peirene in Corinth, enduring to Roman times, was considered sacred and commemorated the place where this hero tamed Pegasus.28 Bellerophon’s battle with Chimaera appears in Corinthian art,29 and Corinthian coins with images of Pegasos connect the Greek myth in solidarity with the new Roman colony.30

Another popular myth centers on King Oedipus. Oedipus has been raised as the son of a royal couple in Corinth after his real parents, King Laius and Queen Jacosta of Thebes, fear an oracle that their infant son would eventually kill Laius. The king gives his servant the child to dispose of him, but the servant gives him to a Corinthian herdsman, who gives him to the Corinthian couple. When he grows up, Oedipus learns from the Oracle at Delphi that he would kill his father and marry his mother. Fate and tragedy take place as he leaves Corinth for Thebes to avoid fulfilling the prophecy. On the way, he quarrels with a man on the road and kills him, not knowing it is his father Laius. After delivering the Thebans from the monstrous Sphynx, the people make Oedipus their king and marry him to the widowed Queen Jacosta, who is secretly his mother. The prophet Tiresias reveals Oedipus as the king’s murderer and predicts calamity. Eventually, after the incestuous couple finds out the truth, Jacosta hangs herself and Oedipus blinds himself with his mother’s brooches (Sophocles, Oed. Rex).31

A final myth we will mention is the tragedy of Medea. Being warned by prophecy against his nephew Jason, Pelias, the usurper of Iolcus, sends him with the Argonauts to retrieve a golden fleece in Colchis. Aphrodite and Cupid protect Jason by having Medea, daughter of King Aeetes of Colchis, fall in love with Jason. With the help of Medea’s magic Jason accomplishes great feats and takes the fleece from Aeetes. The king chases them by ship, and Medea cuts up her brother, flinging occasional pieces into the sea to slow down Aeetes, who must give his son a proper burial. The couple escapes, and Jason delivers the fleece to Pelias but finds out that his uncle was responsible for his family’s death. So Medea tricks Pelias’s daughters into cutting up and boiling the pieces of their father in a cauldron, believing Medea’s magic could bring him back younger than before. Of course, she doesn’t do this and flees with Jason to Corinth.32 In Corinth, Jason marries Glauke, King Kreon’s daughter. This betrayal to Medea prompts her to give a “gift” of a crown and dress to Glauke. As Glauke puts these on, she burns up along with her father, and Medea kills her own children from Jason to get back at him as she escapes to Athens. The fountain of Glauke was reportedly where the princess jumped into the water in an attempt to save herself from Medea’s deadly gift.33 The fountain, like the Peirene, prompted Corinthians in the Roman age to remember its famed Greek past with these stories.34

Clearly, these myths center on conflict, tragedy, honor, love, and a preponderance with death, often brutal, along with the hope of immortality. Moreover, prophecy and fate are well-respected—predictions come to pass even when humans attempt to thwart them. Corinth’s inhabitants would be daily reminded of these stories when seeing statues, paintings, sanctuaries, coins, and inscriptions that inundated their city. These myths prepare them to ponder on death and the afterlife (cf. 1 Cor 15), while at the same time prompt them to respect the words of wise orators and prophets (cf. chs. 1–4; 12–14). If Paul was to proclaim his message successfully in this city, perhaps he prepared himself by learning about some of their religious traditions.35

Paul and the Corinthian Church

The Corinth that Paul visits was one filled with sanctuaries, statues, shops, an agora, and a forum with tribunal that probably inspired his own depiction of Christ on the judgment seat (2 Cor 5:10). A number of small shop keepers, artisans, teachers, and secretaries were among the people of Corinth whom Appian considers poor (Hist. 8.136).36 Alciphron speaks of the area having both immorally rich and miserably poor (Ep. 3.24[iii.60]). Dio Chrysostom, writing in the first century CE, describes the rabble at the Isthmian games: “One could hear crowds of wretched sophists around Poseidon’s temple shouting and reviling one another, and their disciples . . . fighting with one another, many writers reading aloud their stupid works, many poets reciting their poems while others applauded them, many jugglers showing their tricks, many fortune-tellers interpreting fortunes, lawyers innumerable perverting judgment, and peddlers not a few peddling whatever they happened to have” (Or. 8.9).37 Paul perhaps witnessed similar activities. The Corinthian population at this time was perhaps anywhere from 80,000 to 140,000.38

According to Acts 18 he teams up with Prisca and Aquila, fellow Jewish tentmakers recently expelled from Rome by Emperor Claudius,39 and later on Timothy and Silas assist him there. His proclamation of the gospel turns out to be successful—“many” Corinthians believe and are baptized (18:8). The Lord speaks to him in a vision assuring his protection and encouraging him to preach, for “I have many people in this city,” and so Paul remains there for eighteen months (18:9–10). We can assume that this church grew to be fairly large, probably over one hundred converts with their families. The houses of Titius Justus and Gaius became early gathering places (Acts 18:7; Rom 16:23).40

Of the names of seventeen members mentioned by Paul or Acts (1 Cor 1:1, 11, 14; 16:17, 19; Rom 16:1, 21–23; Acts 18:2, 7–8), nine are Greek (Achaicus, Chloe, Crispus, Sosthenes, Stephanas, Erastus, Jason, Phoebe, and Sosipater) and eight are Latin (Aquila, Prisca, Fortunatus, Gaius, Lucius, Quartus, Tertius, and Justus).41 Among these, Crispus, Aquila, Prisca, and possibly Sosthenes, are Jews, but the church mostly consists of Gentiles when Paul writes this letter (1 Cor 8:7; 12:27; cf. Acts 18:6). The Latin names suggest that a number of congregants may be influenced by Roman culture with perhaps a few to several possibly belonging to the upper echelons of society, such as Gaius who houses a church. Among the Greek names, Phoebe, Stephanas, Crispus, and possibly Sosthenes and Erastus might have some prominent social standing.42 Erastus served in a civic administrative capacity as oikonomos for the city (Rom 16:23; see 1 Cor 4:1). It is very questionable, however, that this is the same Erastus named from the famous Corinthian inscription who was an aedile in Corinth.43 Regarding this congregation, Gerd Theissen’s observation is still quite plausible from 1:26–29. When Paul writes that “not many” of the Corinthians were wise, powerful, and noble born, this implies that some of them were.44 I regard this congregation as quite diverse and having many members from the lower classes, but a minority are well-to-do. This minority are those who can afford to purchase meat routinely at the macellum (10:25), be invited to dinners (10:27), and “have” better food at the Lord’s Supper (11:17–34).45 As a church they are better off financially than the Macedonian congregations, which in turn are better off than the poor in Jerusalem for whom they contribute money (16:1–4; 2 Cor 8:1–5).

Occasion and Purpose of the Letter

Paul learns through a report and letter that there are divisions among Corinthian congregation members over their self-identified allegiances with certain leaders—Paul and Apollos primarily—and the solidarity of members is being threatened by their assimilation with outsiders through sexual misconduct, idol meats, and other issues.46 Other divisions and conflicts center on their spiritual activities, worship, the Lord’s Supper, legal disputes, and disputes over the future resurrection. Paul’s challenge is to respond to the plurality of these voices.47 A number of factors may contribute to their factions, not the least of which is that the members are relatively new converts. Paul started the church only a few years earlier, and his departure left them without their founding leader, though others like Apollos temporarily stood in to fill that vacuum (cf. Acts 18:27—19:1). Their misperceptions about wisdom, speeches, freedom in Christ, use of spiritual gifts, and life after death are clearly evident (1 Cor 1:17; 6:12–13; 8:1–2, 8–9; 14:26; 15:12), and public speaking, human wisdom, and boasting stand over against the preaching of the cross, spiritual wisdom, and humility in this letter. This suggests that at least part of the conflict stems from external social and ideological influences on the congregation. I posit that members still esteem status symbols associated with social prestige and wise and eloquent speech.48 The influences of sophism and Roman elitism affect the congregation (see esp. 1:17—2:12).49

Most scholars today hold that 1 Corinthians was originally one letter rather than a compilation of letters.50 Margaret Mitchell’s arrangement based on deliberative rhetoric convincingly supports the letter’s integrity and rightly argues that the primary aim of this letter is to address factional behavior in the congregation and to encourage unity.51 We notice that the central appeal (παρακαλῶ) for solidarity in 1:10 seems linked with an appeal for imitation in 4:16, which in turn connects with the charge for imitation in 11:1. Together these link up with other topics and correspondence questions to which Paul responds in 1:11; 5:1; 7:1; 8:1; 12:1; 15:12; 16:1; and 16:12. In terms of rhetorical arrangement, the supporting proofs of the prothesis in 1:10 include 1:18—4:21; 5:1—7:40; 8:1—11:1; 12:1—14:40; 15:1–58; and 16:1–12. The reader may wish to consult these sections for further understanding, and see the complete outline above. Paul, at any rate, is dealing with a unique set of problems in Corinth, and he must respond to specific issues. He is more concerned about the congregation’s moral and spiritual state than orchestrating a one-tracked, perfect piece of rhetoric on bodily solidarity. Our apostle is foremost a minister of the gospel who, to be sure, attempts to persuade his recipients to accept and enact on his words, but at the same time he trusts ultimately in the Spirit of God for the power, wisdom, and guidance necessary to lead his recipients to that acceptance.

1. On Paul’s early years, see Gal 1:11—2:15; Phil 3:4–6; 2 Cor 11:32–33; Acts 7:54—8:3; 9:1–30; 11:23–30; 13:1—15:25; 22:2–21; 26:4–23; Hengel 1997; Murphy-O’Connor 1996:1–101.

2. Although Acts has its own agenda, Keener 2014:3.2681–83, recently shows that its account of Paul in Corinth is generally reliable.

3. See inscription evidence in Fitzmyer 2008:40–42.

4. For the former date, see e.g., Schnabel 2006:38; for the latter, e.g., Schnelle 1998:57.

5. Thucydides Hist. 1.13.2–5; Strabo Geogr. 8.6.19, 20a, 23d; Dio Chrysostom Or. 37.36.

6. See e.g., Pausanius Descr. 2.1.2; 7.7.1–16.10; Cassius Dio Hist. Rom. 21[9.31]; Strabo Geogr. 23a; Salmon 2006:235–37; Murphy-O’Connor 1983:42–43, 49, 63–64.

7. See Lanci 2005:205–20. Differently, Williams 1986:17–21; Schnabel 2006:22, suggest imported influence from Phoenician-Astarte. Pausanius connects Aphrodite’s cult to Phoenicians (Descr. 1.14.7).

8. See e.g., Hamilton, 1969:32–33.

9. Lanci 2005:220.

10. So Conzelmann 1975:12; Murphy-O’Connor 1983:55–57, 105–6.

11. See James 2014:17–36; Gebhard/Dickie 2003:261–78.

12. Walters 2005:403–4.

13. Millis 2010:13–36; Millis 2013:38–53.

14. Adams/Horrell 2004:3–7; Engels 1990:17–19; Harrison 2008:81–109.

15. Engels 1990:43–65, 121–30.

16. Witherington 1995:8.

17. See Kent 1966:19; Fitzmyer 2008:30; though the graffiti is Greek.

18. Walters 2005:409.

19. Rapid changes in Corinth’s civic identity helped produce “a growing ambiguity in the population’s civic religious identity,” which seems to have resulted in magistrates and decurions being reluctant to enforce laws on private associations (Walters 2005:410).

20. See Fee 1987:3 (though his identities for these terms may be too limiting).

21. See Bookidis 2005:156–64; Walbank 1996:201–14; Coutsoumpos 2008:175–76. For a convenient inscription list on the emperors that is keyed to Meritt 1931, and West 1931; see also Keener 2014:3.2691.

22. Contrast Deissmann 1965:16 (100 BCE–200 CE) with Adams/Horrell 2004:10 (5th c. CE).

23. Pausanius Descr. 2.1.1; Philostratus Vit. soph. 2.611.

24. Pausanius Descr. 2.5.1; cf. Apollodorus Libr. 1.9.3; Homer Il. 6.151–54; Sourvinou-Inwood 1996:1414.

25. See Bitner 2015a:177–78.

26. Gebhard 2005:165–203

27. Pindar Ol. 13.63–92; Homer Il. 6.152–202; Euripedes Bell.; Hamilton 1969:134–37.

28. Robinson 2005:116–27.

29. March 1996:237–38.

30. See Bitner 2015a:174–75, 179–80.

31. Mulroy 2012:73–75.

32. Apollodorus Libr. 1.9.27; Apollonius Argo.; Mulroy 2012:56–62.

33. Pausanius Descr. 2.3.6–11; Euripedes Med.; Epictetus Diatr. 2.17.19–22.

34. Robinson 2005:128–40.

35. See Keener 2014:3.2695.

36. Murphy-O’Connor 1983:66–67, 113, associates freedmen among these workers. The city sites in Paul’s day are conveniently described with maps in Murphy-O’Connor 1984:147–59.

37. Translation in Murphy-O’Connor 1983:94.

38. See various figures in Engels 1990:79–84; Keener 2014:3.2685.

39. On this edict of Claudius against the Jews, see Seutonius Claud. 25.4 (49 CE. Less likely is the date of 41 CE based on Cassio Dio Hist. Rom. 60.6.6). See Fitzmyer 2008:37–40.

40. Unless they are the same person, as McRay 2000:230, suggests.

41. McRay 2000:230.

42. See Theissen 1982:69–119; Meeks 1982:56–60, 215–17. Contrast Meggitt 1998:50–59 (cf. 2001:85–94), who argues the church was in abject poverty. Friesen 2005:351–70 (cf. 2004:323–61) has the Corinthian congregation at “level six,” at or around bare subsistence level and one step away from the lowest poverty. See responses in Theissen 2001:65–84; Theissen 2003:371–91; Thiselton 2000:23–29; Martin 2001:51–64; Barclay 2004:363–66; Mihaila 2009:94–109. Recently, Sanders 2014:103–125, moderately suggests a “middling” population of 20 percent, half of which live several times above subsistence and the other half at or near subsistence. Horrell 2004:367, is similar.

43. On the inscription, see Kent 1966:99–100. Friesen 2010:231–256, argues that οἰκονόμος involves a slave’s role and neither refers to the Latin quaestor nor the aedile. (Differently, Goodrich argues for the quaestor position: “the civic treasury magistrate”: 2012:199; cf. 62–65). It is not clear that this inscription was made at the time of the biblical Erastus, and the full inscription may have possessed a different name prior to its fragmentation: [Ep]erastus. See also Meggitt 1996:218–23.

44. Theissen 1982:72.

45. Meat from the popinae, which the poor may afford, is not the same meat (see Theissen 2003:82–85).

46. There is no evidence for itinerate opponents infiltrating the congregation at this time (see Oropeza 2012a:66–71).

47. Language adopted from Crocker 2004:118–19.

48. On ancient persona, see Aristotle Rhet. 1.5.5; Nguyen 2008a:146–47.

49. See Roman influence on Corinth and further sophist flaws in Winter 2001, esp. xi, 1–28; Winter 2002. I consider the term elitist not in a restricted sense of royalty, senatorial offices, and the super wealthy, but inclusive of the lower upper class: see Dutch 2005:45–46.

50. For compilation views, see recently, Welborn 2013:205–42; Jacon 2006; and discussions in Schnelle 1998:62–65, 73–74; Schnabel 2006:39–42.

51. Mitchell 1991. On rhetorical species and arrangements, see Kennedy 1984:15–25.