1 Cor 1.10-4.21 - Search for Coherence

7/30/2019 1 Cor 1.10-4.21 - Search for Coherence

1/22

"W HA T IS APOLLOS? WH AT IS PAUL?"

IN SEARCH FO R TH E COH ER EN CE OF

FIRST CORINTHIANS 1:10-4:21

by

J O O P F.M. SMIT

Utrecht

Abstract

The coherence of 1 Cor. 1:10-4:21 is studied in three steps. With regard to the

textual syntax it is shown that this passage consists of an introduction (1:10-17),

followed by four separate sections elaborating first the theme of wisdom (1:18-

2:5; 2:6-3:4) and next the division among the Corinthians (3:5-4:5; 4:6-21). At

the semantic level it is argued that adherents of Apollos are Paul's main target

and that in 1:18-19 he alludes to them. Further it is clarified that in rejecting he does not attack rhetoric as such, but human reasoning which

they greatly admire. Finally a pragmatic analysis demonstrates that, following clas

sical status theory, Paul defends himself in four steps against the depreciatory

opinion adherents of Apollos harbor against him.

Scholars are unanimous in their opinion that 1 Cor. 1:10-4:21 forms

a rounded and coherent unit within the first letter of Paul to the

church at Corinth. Upon further consideration of the coherence of this

much-discussed passage they all go their various ways. For that reason it is a difficult task to bring the many, divergent proposals together

into a concise overview. In order to arrange the numerous views I

have distinguished three aspects which are essential to the coherence

of a text: division, where special interest is given to the syntax of the

text; theme, which focuses on the semantics of the text and strategy,

where the pragmatics of the text is the main point of attention.1

These

aspects are not independent, but it is possible and enlightening to distinguish them from each other. By means of this pattern I shall now,


2/22


3/22

THE COHERENCE OF I COR. 1:10-4:21 233

authors, in their turn, do not elaborate their findings into a complete

division of the passage under discussion, based on these segments.Textual semantics are the second point of consideration. In 1 Cor.

1:10-4:21 a large number of themes are discussed. The most important of these are: party strife (1:11-13); the crucified Christ as God'swisdom (1:18-2:5); the revelation of God's hidden wisdom through theSpirit (2:6-3:4); the status of the leaders (3:5-23); the example of theleaders i.e. Paul himself (4:6-21). The question as to how these themesare interrelated and all together form a coherent unity, is apparentlyvery difficult to answer. Widely divergent solutions are proposed. Someauthors hold the view that the semantic coherence of 1 Cor. 1:10-4:21is determined by a combination of a few dominant themes, such asparty strife and wisdom;8 party strife and leadership;9 party strife, leadership and wisdom.10 Other authors consider this passage more as theelaboration of a single, central theme, such as the crucified Christ asGod's wisdom;11 the fight against factionalism;12 the fight against wis

dom understood as the trade of sophists and rhetors;13 the example ofPaul;14 right leadership.15 The search is for a rhetorical situation inwhich the various themes can be related to each other in an unforcedand satisfactory manner.

8 Wei (Dererste Konntherbnef 12) gives 1 Cor 1 10-4 21 as title "ber die Parteien

in der Gemeinde", but in his explanation he adds wisdom to this Barrett (First Epistleto the Connthians, 40) explains 1 Cor 1 10-4 21 under the heading "Wisdom and Divisionat Corinth "

9 Bunker, Bnefformular, 5310 Fee, The First Epistle to the Connthians, 47-51, Merklein, Dererste Bnef an die Konnther

Kapitel 1-4, 101-711 K A Plank, Paul and the Irony ofAffliction (SBLSemeia Studies, Atlanta, Georgia

Scholars Press, 1987) 30-31, Schrge, Der erste Bnef an die Konnther I, 127-812 L L Welborn, "A Conciliatory Principle in 1 Cor 4 6", NovT 29 (1987) 320-46,

esp 334-5, Mitchell, Paul and the Rhetonc ofReconciliation, 199-200, 207-1013 St M Pogoloff, Logos and Sophia The Rhetoncal Situation of 1 Connthians (SBLDS

134, Atlanta, Georgia Scholars Press, 1992) 172, D Litfin, St Paul's Theology ofProclamation


4/22

234 JOOP F.M. SMIT

Textual pragmatics are the final point ofconsideration. What effectdoes Paul intend to achieve with the Corinthian believers by meansofhis discourse in 1 Cor. 1:10-4:21? Authors mostly take the line thatPaul pursues several objectives at the same time, which is a reasonable supposition in view of the many themes which he broaches. Theiractual views are often complicated. Put simply three currents can bedistinguished. A first trend holds that in 1 Cor. 1:10-4:21 Paul primarily fights factionalism at Corinth.16 A second trend contends thatPaul proclaims the cross of Christ in order to fight an overestimation

of wisdom among the Corinthians;17 a recent variant identifies this wisdom as classical rhetoric.18 A third trend asserts that this passage isapologetic in purport; Paul fights the depreciation which a number ofbelievers at Corinth hold against his way of acting among them inorder to reaffirm his authority;19 sometimes this underestimation ofPaul is more in particular ascribed to the followers of Apollos.20

This overview shows that 1 Cor. 1:10-4:21 is a many-sided text, the

coherence of which is difficult to define. It also gives a clear indication of the purpose of this article and of the way which I shall followto reach this end. I intend to show that 1 Cor. 1:10-4:21 is a well-ordered, closely-connected and strategically conceived unity. Three stepsshould lead to this end. First I shall examine how this passage is artic-

16 According to the titles which they ascribe to 1 Cor. 1:10-4:21 the following authors

belong to this current: Wei (Der erste Konntherbnef 12): "ber die Parteien in derGemeinde"; Wolff (Der erste Briefdes Paulus an die Konnther, 24): "Die gefhrdete Einheitder Gemeinde"; Mitchell (Paul and the Rhetoric of Recondliation, 207): "Censure of CorinthianFactionalism and Need for Paul's Advice"; Wellborn ("A Conciliatory Principle", 335)states: "careful reading of the chapters shows that Paul's advice is related to a particular type of deliberative discourse, that which is customarily entitled ."

17Representatives of this current are, among others, Barrett, The FirstEpistle to the

Connthians, 114; Schrge, Der erste Brief an die Konnther I, 128-9.18 Among others Pogoloff, Logos and Sophia, 273-5; Litfin, Paul's Theology of Proclamation

191-2; Winter, Philo and Paul among the Sophists, 201-2.19 This line is strongly advocated by N.A. Dahl, "Paul and the Church at Corinth

according to 1 Corinthians 1:10-4:21", Christian History and Interpretation (FS J. Knox;


5/22


ulated at the level of its textual syntax. Next I intend to specify, at

the level of its textual semantics, which themes are discussed and inwhich waythey are interrelated. Finally I shall, at the pragmatic level,

investigate the effect Paul intends to achieve with the Corinthians by

means ofthis discourse.

1. Delimitation and Division

The first stage ofthis examination proceeds at the level ofthe textual syntax. Its aim is to ascertain how 1 Cor. 1:10-4:21 coheres as a

whole and as a composition ofvarious identifiable parts. To this end

I apply three standards. A first criterion are alternations in the struc

ture ofthe communication. These can be read from the finite forms

of the verbs and from the personal pronouns. A second criterion are

variations in style, recognized by the accumulation ofcertain stylistic

figures.21

The third criterion consists ofkey-words which catch the eye

by their repeated use. Application ofthese standards results in the fol

lowing presentation ofthe coherence and division of1 Cor. 1:10-4:21.

a. The whole passage

Sufficient indications confirm the impression that 1 Cor. 1:10-4:21

forms a relatively independent part ofPaul's letter. This passage con

tains two inclusions. The exhortation (1:10) at thebeginning returns as a conclusion at the end: (4:16).

Next to this, also the proclamation ofthe gospel, initiated by Christ,

which Paul mentions in 1:17:

, is mentioned again at the end in 4:15:

.22

A further indication of the relative independence of 1 Cor. 1:10-

4:21 are two pairs ofwords, which occur very frequently and almost

exclusively in this part ofthe letter. This holds forthe antithetical pair

f / hi h fi d i ti l i 1 17 2 16 3 18


6/22

236 JOOP F.M. SMIT

23; 4:10,23

and also for the combination of the names of Apollos and

Paul, which occurs in 1:12; 3:4-6; 3:22; 4:6.24

The communicationstructure and the style of this passage show strong variations. The fol

lowing examination of its several parts will demonstrate that these alter

nations exhibit a regular pattern, in which communication and style

run parallel to each other.

b. 1 Cor. 1:10-17

In this first section Paul addresses himself in the first person singu

lar as T, to 'you', the believers in Corinth in the second person plural.

Verse 17 forms the transition to the next section. Christ is the sub

ject of this sentence. The antithesis between and

, introduced in this verse, forms the theme which will be

amply elaborated in the subsequent section.

c. 1 Cor. 1:18-2:5

This section consists of two parts. The first part, 1:18-31, exhibits

a distinctive character. Nowhere in these verses Paul refers to himself

in the first person singular. Although 'we' figure some times in w . 18-

25 and 'you' in w . 26-31, general statements in the third person sin

gular and plural are dominant.25

Two declarations of what God has

done form the heart of these statements (w. 21, 27-29). The main

characteristic of this part is its style. Verses 18-31 form a series of various forms of parallelism. Besides, they contain a great number of para

doxes, which twice result in a striking oxymoron (w. 25, 28).

The second part, 2:1-5, exhibits again the direct communication of

1:10-17. With great emphasis, witness the twofold in verses 1

23The file of this pair is as follows:

: 1 Cor. 1:17, 19, 20, 21 (2x), 22, 24, 30; 2:1, 4, 5, 6 (2x), 7, 13; 3:19; 12:8(all occurrences in 1 Cor.)

: 1 Cor 1:19 20 25 26 27; 3:10 18 (2x) 19 20; 6:5 (all occurrences in


7/22

THE COHERENCE OF I COR. 10-4:21 237

and 3, Paul again addresses himself as T, in the first person singular,

to 'you', the Corinthians in the second person plural. Notwithstanding

the rather abrupt change in the structure of communication and the

style, this part should definitely be considered as a sequel to 1:18-31.

Both parts are clearly connected by means of key-words. The terms

and from 1:18 return in resp. 2:1 and 5. The

decisive links are that , the principal formula of

1:18-25, returns in 2:1-2 and that , a central notion from

1:26-31, as emphatically holds first place in 2:3-5. The

rejection of in the last verse (2:5) announces the theme

which will be elaborated in the next section.

d. 1 Cor. 2:6-3:4

Just as the preceding section this one also encompasses two parts.

In 2:6-16 Paul emphatically speaks in the first person plural. The three

fold (w. 6, 7, 13) together with the threefold emphatical (w. 10, 12, 16) clearly demonstrate this. Moreover, these verses

exhibit a special style. This passage consists for the greater part of dis

tinctions, a number of which can be recognized by the antithesis

(w. 6-7, 8-9, 12, 13). Redundant repetition of the same words

and the frequent use of amplifying additions lend a verbose and solemn

character to these verses.26

In 3:1-4 Paul returns to the direct communication between and

'you'. This transition is marked by the expression , , the

same as in 2:1. That 3:1-4, notwithstanding its different structure of

communication, definitely belongs to 2:6-16 is apparent from the key

words which both parts have in common. Important terms such as

(2:6, 7, 13) and (2:13 [2x], 15) are repeated at the

beginning of the last part (3:1). The main link is the one between

in 2:6 and .. . , its oppo

site, in 3:1. In addition the formula . . . . is also repeated twice

in 3:1 2 The repetition of the exclamations with which the one ranges


8/22

238 JOOP F.M. SMIT

e. 1 Cor. 3:5-4:5

This section consists of three parts. In 3:5-17 Paul discusses the status of Apollos and of himself: ; ;

(. 5). This part predominantly contains general statements in the third

person singular. Typical in this respect are the substantivized partici

ples in w . 7-8 and the repeated in w . 12-17. It is true that the

first person singular occurs a few times, but here this means that Paul

discusses his own position. This part is completely phrased in metaphor

ical language. Paul successively compares the local church with a field,

a building and a temple. His elaboration has an allegorical character

and focuses on the various tasks and achievements of the workers, i.e.

the agricultural laborers and the construction workers.

Also in the second part, 3:18-23, general statements in the third

person singular are predominant. Typical in this case are and

followed by an imperative (w. 18, 21). It is true that the personal

pronoun 'you' occurs a few times, but this is an indication that in this

part Paul discusses the position of the Corinthians. This is confirmed

by the carefully arranged hierarchical succession in which this part

results (w. 21-23). By means of an enumeration and a catena Paul

forms a climax.27

In the third part, encompassing 4:1-5, Paul begins in general terms

(w. 1-2), but then addresses himself again in the first person singular

directly to the Corinthians in the second person plural. The argument

for considering 3:5-4:5 as one single section is that the third part rassumes elements from both preceding parts and connects them with

each other. In 4:1-2 Paul uses metaphorical language just as in 3:5-

17; the servants () and stewards () of 4:1 clearly con

cur with the servants () (3:5) and fellow workers ()

(3:9) mentioned previously. Also the judgement theme in 4:3-5 con

curs with the judgement as discussed in 3:12-17; by means of synec

doche the judgement is referred to in both instances as 'day' ()(3:13; 4:3). At the same time Paul in 4:1-5 uses the hierarchy stated


9/22


10/22

240 JOOP F.M. SMIT

in a particular conclusion concerning his relationship with the Corinthians.

Now that we have a general view of 1 Cor. 1:10-4:21 as a whole,

the connection between 1:10-17 and the four subsequent sections alsobecomes clear. Key-words reveal the right disposition. In 1:12 the

names of Paul and Apollos occur, joined together, for the first time:

"I am of Paul; I am of Apollos." We find these two names again at

the beginning of the third section (3:5-4:5) as well as at the beginning

of the fourth section (4:6-21). In 1:17 we meet a combination of two

substantives: . It cannot be a mere coincidence, that

the first section (1:18-2:5) opens with one of these substantives, ,and the second section (2:6-3:4) with the other one, . These data

demonstrate that the passage 1:10-17 indeed functions as an intro

duction to 1 Cor. 1:10-4:21. Here Paul brings up for discussion two

themes, namely the question of the parties and the question of his

own proclamation , which he subsequently elabo

rates, each of them in two rounds. The further particulars of the con

tent of these two themes as well as of the connection between them

now ask for our attention. This brings us to the analysis of the tex

tual semantics of this passage.

2. Two Themes and TheirConnection

About the purport of the two themes which Paul broaches in his

introduction (1:10-17) and subsequendy elaborates resp. in 1 Cor. 1:18-

3:4 and 3:5-4:21, opinions are very divided. Paul mentions divisions

and quarrels and in that context lists four names: "I am of Paul, I

am of Apollos, I am of Cephas, I am of Christ" (1:12). Does this mean

that, in his opinion, four parties are at variance with each other at

Corinth?30

Or does the slogan "I am of Christ" suppose no real party,

so that three of them are left?31

Or are the other names a kind of cover

and are the adherents of Apollos alone the cause of the problems?32


11/22

THE COHERENCE OF I COR. 1: 10 - 4 : 2 1 241

In dispute is also whetherPaul exclusively intends to restore the unity

or that he personally is at stake and defends himself against allega

tions.33

Apparendy, in 1:18-3:4 and 3:5-4:21, both themes stand detached

from each other34

and it is up to the reader to find out the connec

tion. This task is further thwarted because also the wisdom theme is

open to several interpretations. Paul's assertion in 1:17 that he has

been sent to proclaim the gospel does mean, accord

ing to some that he renounces philosophical wisdom, according to oth

ers that he rejects the use of the devices of rhetoric. Most scholars

combine these two options in an often laborious compromise.35 I now

intend, by way of a close reading ofthe text, to further define each

of these themes, also with regard to their connection with each other.

In this manner the coherence as to content is brought to light and a

broad reconstruction ofthe rhetorical situation can be made.

a. The question 'Apollos'

First we investigate who are involved in the discord and which role

they play in this respect. The four passages in which Paul direcy

addresses the Corinthians, together with the passage in which he explic-

ity discusses his relationship to Apollos (3:5-17) offer a clear guide

line to this end. Paul expressly contends that he has founded the church

at Corinth (3:10; 4:15). At the time ofhis sojourn he must have made

a favorable impression on the candidate believers. In 2:1-5 as well as

in 3:1-4 he brings up for discussion this former founding visit (2:1, 3;

3:1-2). Obviously, now that he writes the letter, criticism has arisen at

that previous contact for Paul is clearly on the defensive. In 2:1-5 he

stresses the qualities, which he lacked during that visit: he did not

role to the group ofApollos, but places a distinct group of Paul over against it.According to this author advocates ofwisdom and supporters ofglossolaly are fightingeach other. The cautious analysis ofKer ("Paul and Apollos", 75-97) suggests that Pauladdresses himself almost exclusively to the followers ofApollos.


12/22

242 JOOP F.M. SMIT

come "with superiority of reason or wisdom"; he came "with weakness and with fear and trembling" and therefore not with force and

self-confidence and "the persuasive power of wisdom." In 3:1-4 heexplicity draws attention to the manner in which he could not addressthem at the time: "I could not speak to you as to spiritual persons,but only as to fleshy ones," not as adults (3:6), but "as mere infants";I could feed you only "with milk not with solid food." Paul evidendyoffers resistance to a negative valuation of his founding visit of whichhe suspects a number of Corinthian believers.

The reason for this negative turn in the estimation of the Corinthianscan be gathered from 3:5-17, a passage in which Paul amply discussesthe status of Apollos and of himself. Although he openly declares thatboth of them are servants of God through whom the Corinthians cameto believe (3:5), he at the same time establishes the right order betweenApollos and himself. He has planted, Apollos has watered the plants(3:6); he has laid the foundation, someone else i.e. Apollos is building

on it (3:10).36

So Apollos has come to Corinth after Paul. Apparentlyhis arrival has negatively influenced the valuation of certain believersat Corinth concerning Paul's former visit. This is confirmed by 4:1-5,a passage in which clearly comes to the fore that the Corinthians judgePaul against his will (4:3, 5) and by 4:6, a verse in which it becomesapparent that the Corinthians puff themselves up "everyone of you onbehalf of the one and against the other."37 This theme is completed

by 4:14-21. In this passage Paul demands the status and authoritywhich, as the father of the community, is his due and assigns to Apollosa place among the numerous 'pedagogues' (4:14-15, 21).

These observations justify the conclusion that in 1 Cor. 1:10-4:21Paul actually turns himself against certain adherents of Apollos. Intheir recent admiration for Apollos they now estimate the precedingvisit of Paul, during which he founded the community, as inferior. Asto the four slogans mentioned in the introduction, this means that only


13/22


the message of support "I am of Apollos" names the real conflict. The

names of Paul, Cephas and Christ are a kind of maneuver to bring

about an indirect, diffuse approach. In this manner Paul evades a

direct confrontation immediately antagonizing the adherents of Apollos,

who are already not favorably disposed toward him.

b. The musing link

At first sight no connections exist between the text block (3:5-4:21)

in which the theme 'division' and the one (1:18-3:4) in which thetheme 'wisdom' is discussed. After the mention of the names in 1:12

nothing else refers to the question 'Apollos' until the repetition of the

two messages of support in 3:4: "The one says: I am of Paul, and the

other: I am of Apollos." The intervening block seems dedicated exclu

sively to the theme of wisdom. At closer inspection, however, 1:18-3:4

does contain a positive reference to the question 'Apollos' and that

right at the beginning in 1:18-19.

In the opening lines of his exposition on the paradoxical wisdom

of God, Paul twice uses the verb . First he mentions o

("those who are perishing") (v. 18). Next, by means of a

quotation from Scripture beginning with , he elucidates who are

concerned. In this quotation God is saying: "I will destroy () the

wisdom of the wise and the intelligence of the intelligent I will frus

trate" (v. 19). Does Paul allude here to the name of Apollos? Or, more

precisely, is an allusion to the adherents of Apollos, the

'Apollinists' so to say, and to the name of there revered leader?

The following arguments make this suggestion plausible.

1. The verb is used twice here so that it is rather con

spicuous. By itself the qualification in verse 18 is not

unique and occurs more often in the pauline corpus, as for instance

in 2 Cor. 4:3; 2 Thess. 2:10. In 2 Cor. 2:15 we even find the same

antithesis between and as we have here.What sets 1 Cor. 1:18-19 apart is that is elucidated by


14/22

244 JOOP F.M. SMIT

("I would like to reap some profit from you") towards the end of the

letter (v. 20).38

3. In Antiquity the name of the god Apollo is often associated with

the verb . This is even said to be "a widespread ancient

view".39

This presumably also rings through in Rev. 9:11: "As king

they have over them the angel of the abyss, whose name in Hebrew

is Abaddon and in Greek he has the name ." This estab

lished, well-known association between the name Apollo and the verb

paves the way for Paul making this allusion and for his pub

lic recognizing it.

These arguments reveal an important link connecting the two themes

which Paul elaborates in 1 Cor. 1:10-4:21. In 1:12 Paul makes known

in covert terms that the adherents of Apollos are his principal target.

Following this up in 1:18-19 he suggests, again in covert terms, that

the exposition on the wisdom of God making foolish the wisdom of

the world is intended especially for the Apollinists. These people who

depreciate Paul are the wise and intelligent whose wisdom and intelligence God will destroy. Only with the repetition of "I am of Paul,

I am of Apollos" (3:4) the followers of Apollos unmistakably reappear.

We now have reason to think that since 1:18-19 they are highly listed

on Paul's hidden agenda.

c. The theme of wisdom

By declaring that he proclaims the gospel (1:17)

Paul announces the theme of the next two sections (1:18-2:5; 2:6-3:4).

Also in this case his intention is not simply clear. Two interpretations

demand closer inspection.

Ever more experts take as the equivalent of the Latin

ars rhetorica and render Paul's words as "not with rhetorical skill."40

In

this view Paul contends in 1:17 the thesis that rhetoric and the cross


15/22


of Christ do not go together. To my view this interpretation is unten

able for the following reasons.

1. The two passages, in which Paul elaborates his thesis, namely

1:18-31 and 2:6-16, belong to the most rhetorical parts he has written and do not betray a single trace of his presumed aversion against

rhetoric.

2. In his elucidation in 1:18-25 Paul demonstrates exacty the reverseof this thesis by proclaiming the crucified Christ in a highly rhetori

cal fashion.

3. In 1:18-31; 2:6-16 Paul rejects the wisdom of the cosmos (1:20)and the wisdom of this aeon (2:6). Over against this wisdom he places

the foolishness of the cross as Gods wisdom and not the renunciation

of rhetoric.

4. A striking illustration of these counter-arguments is offered by

the scriptural quotation in 1:19. Paul has enhanced the already highly

rhetorical form of Isa. 29:14 by replacing found in the LXX

by , which rhymes more nicely with .41

Moreover, theparallelism of this quotation shows that "the wisdom of the wise"

does not refer to their eloquence but is equivalent to their "sagacity"

().

A second interpretation deserves our attention. Instead of "verbal

utterance, saying, speech" can also have the meaning of "rea

son" in the sense of "ratio, reasoning, logic."42

In the combination

the genitive further defines the kind of wisdom which ismeant as in ("human wisdom") (2:5) and

("divine wisdom") (1:25; 2:7). In this view the rule

comes to mean: "not with rational, reasoning, logical wisdom." This

reading is to be preferred for the following reasons.

1. The two passages which follow elaborate the thesis of 1:17 exactiy

in this sense. The first one (1:18-31) is a series of paradoxes which

demonstrate that the cross of Christ makes the wisdom of the world

foolish by putting human reasoning out ofjoint. The second one (2:

6) t d th t G d' i d i hidd f th i d f h


16/22

246 JOOP F.M. SMIT

2. The interpretation of as proposed, fits excelleny at two

places where Paul uses this term, namely: "The logic () of thecross is foolishness to those who are perishing" (1:17) and "When I

came to you, brothers, I did not come proclaiming God mystery with

preeminent logic () or wisdom" (2:1).

3. In 2:4-5 Paul asserts that his proclamation was

' . As is apparent from verse 5,

the antithesis here concerns "the wisdom of men" and "the Spirit and

power of God." The choice of the technical term , whichstands for "syllogistic demonstration", shows that also the expression

"the persuasive power of wisdom" refers more to logical argumenta

tion than to rhetorical design. Over against the persuasive power of

the reasoning of human wisdom Paul places a demonstration of a com

pletely different, divine order.43

4. Understanding the plural in 2:13 not as 'the words', but

as 'the reasonings' makes much better sense in the context. To 'the

reasonings of human wisdom' Paul opposes 'the reasonings of the

Spirit', which and persons cannot grasp and only

persons can understand.44

d. The rhetorical situation

This semantic analysis enables us to reconstruct in broad outine

the rhetorical situation of 1 Cor. 1-4. The story begins with Paul'sfirst and up to this moment only visit to the city of Corinth. Evidendy

his preaching was successful, for his effort resulted in the foundation

of an (1:1). After Paul's departure Apollos, in his

turn, arrived in Corinth. The effects of his teaching with the Corinthians

seem to suggest that it was of a much more rational and philosophi

cal character than the proclamation with which his predecessor had

laid the foundation of the community.45

A number of believers reacted

very enthusiastically to this and highly preferred Apollos to Paul. In


17/22


18/22

248 J O O P F.M. SMIT

theory appears to be an adequate instrument to identify the steps of

his discussion.48

In the introduction (1:10-17) Paul indicates whom he addresses and

which case is at stake. Actually Paul addresses the followers ofApollos.

That in verse 12 he names four groups should be considered as a

form of insinuatio. By this way he avoids an all too direct confronta

tion with the group ofpeople, who already do not appreciate him too

highly.49

With the words "not with reasoning wisdom" in verse 17 he

defines the question at stake. The Apollinists reproach him with a lack

of philosophical rationality. Paul concedes this allegation almost in passing. He does not fight the fact as such {status coniecturalis: an sit; a

fecerii), but conducts his defense through the question as to how this

fact should be interpreted, whether he has rightiy acted in this way

or not {status qualitatis: quale sit; an iure, recte fecerit).

In the first round of argumentation (1:18-2:5) Paul explains two

divine norms. God has made the wisdom ofthe world foolish by the

proclamation of the crucified Christ (1:18-25); God has chosen theweak of the world to shame the strong and impressive (1:25-31).

Subsequently he applies these two norms to his former visit to Corinth.

That his arrival was not attended with superior logic orwisdom is in

complete conformity with the first divine norm (2:1-2). That his appear

ance was weak and unimpressive is in harmony with the second divine

norm (2:3-5). Paul here contends that his so-called inferior presenta

tion actually meets the highest divine standards {status qualitatis: constitute iuridicialis absoluta).

In the second round ofargumentation (2:6-3:4) Paul asserts that he

is just as competent as Apollos to teach the secret wisdom ofthe plan

of salvation which God has revealed (2:6-16).50

Subsequentiy this leads

to the conclusion that the Corinthians themselves and in particularthe

adherents ofApollos are the cause of the incapability ofwhich they

accuse Paul: they were not ready for it. By the triplet: "I could not

( ) speak to you . . . for as yet you could not (


19/22


20/22

250 JOOP F.M. SMIT

legitimacy of the trial at two points, this time from the person of the

accused and from the person of the prosecutor {translatio a persona re

et a persona accusatoris).

This pragmatic analysis proves that in 1 Cor. 1:10-4:21 Paul deploys

a well-considered strategy following the classical status theory. This

definitely is an apology.54

Paul defends himself against the deprecia

tion, which in particular the adherents of Apollos harbor against

him. In the light of Apollos' later teaching they, in retrospect, esti

mate Paul's preceding proclamation by which he founded the com

munity as inferior.

All along his discourse Paul uses the tactics of insinuation and refers

in covert terms to the real addressees, the Apollinists who do not hold

him in high esteem, this in order not to alienate them further. This

device is applied in various ways. First, as a kind of smoke screen, not

one but four names are mentioned (1:12). Then, a covert allusion to

the name of Apollos follows (1:18-19). Next two names are mentioned,

those of Paul and Apollos, equal servants of whom Paul happens tobe the leader and Apollos the 'other' who builds on the foundation

laid by his predecessor (3:5, 10). After a repetition of the four names

(3:22) finally the real issue comes to light, but still the Apollinists are

not called directly by their name: "You puff yourselfup each on behalf

of the one and against the other." (4:6)55

The final objective of Paul's apology is the restoration of his author

ity. The general exhortation to be united in mind and thought (1:10),with which he begins, leads by way of the long argument admonish

ing the slanderers (4:13) to the reaffirmation of the right relations and

the declaration of the final conclusion: Paul is the father, the Corinthians

are his children and Apollos is one of the coundess 'pedagogues';56

5 4 Contra Fitzgerald (CracL in an Earthen Vessel, 128) who completely overlooks the

role of Apollos and his followers.


21/22


22/22

^ s

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual useaccording to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as

otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the

copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,

reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a

violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permissionfrom the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journaltypically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specificwork for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or coveredby your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding thecopyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previouslypublished religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAScollection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the AmericanTheological Library Association.

Date post:	14-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	31songofjoy
View:	225 times
Download:	0 times

1 Cor 1.10-4.21 - Search for Coherence

Documents