Part 111
Paul on the Attack (10:1-13:10)
Chs. 1-9 reflect some problems in the community, but their tone is nevertheless often hopeful and conciliatory (e.g. 7:416). In contrast, the tone of chs. 10—13 is consistently harsh, anxious, and sarcastic. Therefore, most biblical scholars have accepted the theory that they originally constituted a separate letter. There is significant debate, however, as to where they fit in the chronology of letter fragments. They have frequently been identified with the 'tearful letter' mentioned in 2:3—4, 9> which means that the letter would have been written prior to chs. 1-9. Paul's more optimistic tone in the earlier chapters would then be understood as stemming from the resolution of most of the difficulties in the community. But several objections have been raised against this theory, based upon both the chronology of events suggested by the content of 2 Corinthians and the nature of the problem which is explicitly related to the 'tearful letter'. The suggestion of 7:4—16 is that at the time of composition of chs. 1-9, Titus had been to Corinth only once, while it appears that by the time 12:14-18 was composed he had been there twice. This implies that chs. 10—13 came later. Moreover, the case of the lapsed Corinthian brother dominates the concern in chs. 1-9 about the 'tearful letter' (2:3-11; cf. 7:8-12), but nowhere do we read about him
2 CORINTHIANS 1146
uses the opportunity to bring the focus of community back to the content of his letters. The true nature of his strength will be made clear through his actions when he comes to Corinth and does what he has said in his letters. Underlying these verses may be the suspicion that Paul is avoiding direct contact with the Corinthians, perhaps relying too heavily on his talent as a letter-writer and on fellow-workers to act as his delegates. (10:12-18) Opponents Accused of Interference In this section Paul moves from responding to accusations made against him to launching some attacks of his own upon his opponents
for in this text the apostle's very humanity is qualified by a claim to divine power. The military imagery serves Paul well here, because it communicates his belief that he is empowered by forces which are beyond this world to conquer this world (cf. 6:7). Throughout the text Paul sends the message that he will not be intimidated. When the Corinthians have demonstrated their loyalty to him, he will be ready to deal firmly with his opponents (v. 6).
(10:7—11) Accusations against Paul Denied The call to recognize what is plainly evident is designed to alert the community to danger. Behind the appeal is probably an accusation made by the intruders which has won support among the Corinthians. The opponents appear to have based their authority on a special connection to Christ (implied in 'belonging to Christ'; cf. 11:4, 13, 23). They may have claimed access to special visionary experiences of the resurrected Christ (12:1— 10; 5:11—13). But since Paul's commission as an apostle was also based on such experiences (i Cor 9:1; 15:8; Gal 1:12) yet the basis of his authority was being judged as inadequate, it is more likely that the claim concerned a special connection to the historical Jesus or to his followers, perhaps those connected with the Jerusalem church (cf. 11:22). The fact that Paul did not know the historical Jesus, had initially persecuted the church, and had entered the circle of apostles late in the game proclaiming that he had received a revelation of Christ, seems to have led to widespread questions and suspicions about his apostolic status (i Cor 15:7-9). If the question of connection with the historical Jesus is involved in his battle with the Corinthian opponents, it is a matter of charismatic authority versus tradition. Given the importance of the appeal to tradition in Jewish teaching, it is not surprising that tension between charismatic authority and tradition can be detected in the attempts to organize the early church (Rowland 1985: 266-7). Paul is unequivocal, however, in v. 8. His authority is charismatic (2 COR 10:1-6); it was given to him by the Lord (i.e. the resurrected Christ; cf. 13:10). The concept of boasting which permeates (2 Corinthians 2 COR 1:12—14) is employed in an interesting way here and throughout chs. 10-13; its use
(Furnish 1988: 1199). In v. 12 he is clearly being sarcastic: he would not even presume to compare himself with those who commend themselves! He probably has in mind here the use of letters of recommendation by his rivals (cf. 3:1—3). Herejects both the self-commendation of his opponents and the nature of their comparisons with one another as completely misguided. They act according to worldly commendations, when only commendation by the Lord is relevant (w. 17—18). To make his point forcefully, he draws upon the contentious notion of boasting (citing Jer 9:23-4) in order to call for a return to central priorities: boasting should be done only in the Lord (v. 17; cf. i Cor 1:31; Phil 3:3). The exact meaning of w. 13-16 is not always clear and there are severe problems in translating (esp. v. 13; see Barrett 1973: 263-6). However, the main point is clear: Paul's mission to the Corinthians has divine authorization; his opponents have not respected his prerogatives as the founder of the community and have interfered in his 'sphere of action' (v. 16). These verses reveal the somewhat curious preoccupation (at least from a modern perspective) of divisions of missionary labour. Paul's principle was that he would bring the good news only to communities where it had never been preached. 'Boasting of work already done in someone else's sphere of action' (v. 16) was 'building on someone else's foundation' (Rom 15:20). An understanding of the dynamics of patronage can shed light on Paul's exclusive claims and jealousy. Paul refers to himself as the Corinthians' spiritual parent in a way that conveys the nature of his relationship with them as their benefactor (12:14; Witherington 1995: 418; cf. i Cor 4:14—16). He endowed them with the gift of salvation and, in turning to other apostles, they betray the loyalty that should exist between patron and client and fail to honour him as clients should. Paul's desire for an increasing sphere of action expressed in w. 15-16 is a means of calling for a strengthened relationship with the Corinthian community as their patron which will free him to move on, and bring the good news to new territories (cf. Rom 15:23—4).
is characterized by ambivalence and irony which becomes even more pronounced in the fool's speech of 11:1—12:13. Th£
opponents may have accused him of boasting too much of his authority, but Paul admits that such extremes are necessary for the health of the Corinthians. Boasting and self-promotion were the conventional means of articulating where honour and shame were to be found in Graeco-Roman society (Witherington 1995: 432). Paul is faced with the difficulty of harmonizing his conviction that in the early church many of the usual criteria for determining honour have been abandoned (e.g. skill in rhetorical performance), with the necessity of communicating priorities in a cultural context which demanded public demonstrations of worth. It sometimes seems to Paul that in communicating his priorities he is resorting to worldly standards: he boasts a little too much! In v. 10 Paul quotes an accusation made against him directly (cf. 10:1). He has been accused of weak physical presence and poor oral performance of rhetoric. It seems that even his critics acknowledge his skill in writing rhetorical pieces (Witherington 1995: 433). In w. 9—11 Paul admits that his letters are strong, but instead of declaring that he is equally strong in speech, he
(11:1—12:13) The Fool's Speech
(11:1—4) The Threat of Corruption The whole of 11:1—12:13 is
dominated by the concept that Paul is speaking like a fool. To a certain extent, Paul engages in parody in this section: he imitates the tactics (sophistic eloquence and rhetorical selfpraise) of his opponents (Witherington 1995: 436). But the reference to foolishness in the context of v. i makes it clear that he is not altogether comfortable with the measures he has adopted. He is in fact engaging in the kind of comparison which he has just rejected as ultimately irrelevant, and he therefore risks giving the impression that he shares the preoccupations of his opponents (10:12-18). One can appreciate
"47 2 CORINTHIANS
the intruders, who not only rate themselves highly, but have probably also gained considerable prestige in the community (Georgi 1986: 39). v. 6 has been judged to be a frank admission by Paul of a liability (Witherington 1995: 435). In these earliest stages of church development, norms are being institutionalized with respect to judgement of apostolic legitimacy and talent, and Paul is not always able to meet group expectations. He calls for a realignment of community norms based on true knowledge of God (v. 6; cf. 10:5). Paul's shifting of labels from super-apostles to false apostles does not necessarily imply that two different groups are in view, but may stem from Paul's shifting perspectives. According to some standards (which he himself rejects) these apostles are powerful leaders. But according to the ultimate standard of God, they are merely disguising themselves as apostles of Christ (v. 13). In w. 7-11 Paul offers a specific example of his behaviour in order to defend himself against accusations concerning his authority and credibility. The Corinthians may have harboured suspicions about Paul's attitudes to money and dealings with the collection, and these ideas may have left the opportunity ripe for the intruders to gain support. Paul has refused financial support from the Corinthians and refers to his principle ironically and with exaggeration by speaking of committing sin (v. 7), and robbing from other churches for the Corinthians' sake (v. 8). Paul continued to work as an artisan while he conducted his missionary work (i Cor 4:12; i Thess 2:9), apparently refusing the support to which other apostles were entitled (i Cor 9:12, 15-18). This refusal to accept living expenses may have been related to the desire to avoid being a client of Corinthian patrons, and to the fear of contributing to the already serious problem of community factions (2 COR 8:16-24). But it may also have led to frustration among the Corinthians who may have argued that Paul abrogated societal conventions with respect to itinerant teachers and degraded himself (and them) with manual labour. Paul makes it abundantly clear, however, in v. 10, that he has no intention of changing his approach. The reference to friends from Macedonia in v. 9 may be in response to the charge that he has allowed himself to become a client ofthe Macedonians. Paul reveals that he did accept special gifts from the Philippian church in Macedonia (Phil 4:10-20), but was apparently unwilling to accept such support in Corinth. The question also arises as to whether Macedonian generosity in the collection (8:1-5)was related to the nature ofthe patronage relationship he had with them. But Paul continues to have confidence in his boast, making it clear that his attitude towards support from the Corinthian church is a public demonstration of his honour (v. 10) and is motivated by his love for the community
the difficulty of Paul's position; he lives in a society which demands public display of its itinerant teachers (cf 2 COR 10:7—11). Yet there is a desperate and sometimes almost tragic sound to Paul's words, as he laments about an apostleship whose strength has not been recognized in weakness. In w. i4 Paul makes use of a marriage metaphor to communicate the seriousness of the threat which has penetrated the community from the outside. The gravity of the situation as Paul perceived it would not have been missed by an audience of the time, for he appeals to the core values of honour and shame. Paul places himself in the role of father (cf. 12:14) °f a virgin (the community) who is giving her in marriage to her one true husband (Christ). It is the father's duty to protect the honour of the virgin; and it is the virgin daughter's duty to remain chaste, symbolizing her shame (concern for reputation) and the shame of her whole household. But Paul fears that the virgin daughter will be violated by a seducer. The image of the corruption of the internal sanctity of the virgin daughter is a powerful means of communicating the nature of the threat which comes from the outside. Indisputable evidence is offered in v. 4 that the problem in the community is not only internal, but involves teachers from the outside who preach a message that Paul understands to be in contradiction to his own. The reference to proclamation of another Jesus may imply an appeal on the part of the 'false apostles' to greater continuity with the historical Jesus (cf. 10:7; 2 COR 10:7—11). w. 2—3 are dense in allusions to Scripture and traditional notions of marriage. The role of the father in giving his virgin daughter in marriage is reflected in such texts as Gen 29:23 and Deut 22:13—21. Th£ use of the marriage metaphor to address the relationship of the community with the divine draws upon the traditional notion of marriage as a metaphor for YHWH's relationship to Israel (e.g. Hos 2:19-20). The image of the virgin (community) joining together with the bridegroom (Christ) is developed further in Eph 5:21—33. The reference to Eve being deceived by the serpent presupposes the temptation story (Gen 3:1-24). In Jewish tradition the serpent became identified with the devil (Sir 2:24; cf. Rev 20:2). Paul's interpretation here, with its overtones of seduction and sexual conquest, may reflect knowledge of a Jewish legend contained in the pseudepigrapha (2 Enoch, 31:6; cf. i Tim 2:13—14) where the serpent is identified with Satan and Eve's deception involves sexual seduction
(Murphy-O'Connor 1990: 826).
(11:5—15) The Super-Apostles The transition from 11:4 to 11:5 implies that those who come into Corinth are described sarcastically by Paul as 'super-apostles', ton hyperlian apostolon (cf. 12:11). It has also been suggested, however, that these super-apostles are not the intruders that Paul labels so negatively as 'false apostles', pseudapostoloi, in v. 13 (e.g. Barrett 1971: 249-53). Paul's qualified admission thatthe status ofthe super-apostles equals his own (cf. 12:11) has sometimes led to the conclusion that they were leaders ofthe Jerusalem church
(v. n). In w. 12-15 me accusation made against Paul concerning his refusal to accept financial support from the Corinthians is transformed by him into an indication of the false apostles' inadequacy and dishonesty. Only by accepting the same attitude to support as does Paul, might these apostles show themselves to be Paul's equal (v. 12). The implication is clearly that these false apostles have been taking advantage ofthe Corinthians. The description of Satan disguising himself as an angel of light echoes 11:3 and reflects Jewish legends about the deception of Eve by the devil (Apoc. Mas. 17.1—2; Adam and Eve 9.1 [Latin]; Adam and Eve 38.1 [Slavonic]; Furnish 1984: 494-5). The use ofthe terms 'apostle' and 'minis-
(cf. Gal 2:9); the false apostles may then have been their envoys, whom Paul condemns categorically as intruders (v. 13; for a full summary ofthe debate concerning identity of super-apostles, see Furnish 1984: 502-5). But the emphasis on rhetorical performance in oral delivery (v. 6) seems to support the notion that these super-apostles are themselves
2 CORINTHIANS 1148
is supported by the frequent use of the terms diakonos and diakonia throughout 2 Corinthians (on deacon, see OCB s.v). The opponents' understanding of their connection with Christ may have differed from that of Paul, however, with respect to claims of a special relationship with the historical Jesus (2 COR 10:7—11; w. 1—4, 5—15). Paul illustrates that he is a better minister/servant of Christ by describing a ministry of suffering and humiliation. He appeals once again to a catalogue of hardships (v. 23) which functions in 2 Corinthians in conjunction with the apostle's theology of the cross (w. 30—1). This catalogue recalls the terms used by philosophers in the ancient world to describe their struggles in the overcoming of passion and in the search for wisdom (2 COR4:7~I5). But there is no heroism in Paul's attitude towards his troubles; v. 29 in fact records the sentiment of injustice in suffering. Yet suffering is far from meaningless; it offers demonstrative proof of Paul's weakness (v. 30), which is a sign of his identification with Christ (12:9). Because Paul appeals to the extent of his hardships to respond directly to the claims of superiority made by his opponents (v. 23), and because the theme of inappropriate boasting permeates the discussion (w. 16-23), it is tempting to conclude that the opponents viewed their own apostolic struggles as heroic or as signs of their 'strength' of character. The sufferings mentioned in the catalogue of hardships cover many aspects of Paul's life: work as an artisan (w. 23, 27), travel (w. 25—6), persecution (w. 23—6), church life (w. 26, 28). Particularly intriguing is the reference to 'false brethren' in v. 26. The same term is used by Paul to describe those who seek to impose the law on Gentile Christians in Gal 2:4 (Murphy-O'Connor 1990: 827). The list offers evidence of persecution at the hands of both Jews and Gentiles. The legal basis for the 'forty lashes' is found in Deut 25:1-3. Being 'beaten with a rod' was a Roman punishment. Although a law prohibited the imposition of this punishment on Roman citizens, it was frequently ignored; Paul protests this punishment in Acts 16:37 (cfActs 16:22; i Thess 2:2; Furnish 1984: 516). In fact, the reference to the beatings offers evidence of one of many points of contact between this text and accounts in Acts. However, as is illustrated by comparing the reference to the narrow escape from Damascus (w. 32-3) with the account in Acts 9:23-5, the stories do not always present the same picture of the apostle. While in 2 Corinthians the story illustrates Paul's humiliation and weakness, in Acts it communicates the apostle's bravery and invincible mission (Furnish 1988: 1201).
ter' (diakonos) (terms Paul applies to himself) in the condemnation of the intruders suggests that, despite the polemic and the parody, the threat to Paul's apostolic authority cuts to the heart.
(11:16-210) The 'Wise' Corinthians In v. 16 Paul repeats the appeal of 11:1 to bear with him as he plays the part of the fool. It is almost as if he is aware that he has been digressing from his main speech in 11:2-15. He explicitly states in w. 17-18 that he is speaking not with the Lord's authority, but boasting (2 COR 1:12-14) according to the human standards of his opponents. In w. 19—2ia the apostle employs irony and engages in extreme sarcasm. He draws upon the community's reputation for thinking itself wise (i Cor 2:6-16; 4:10; 6:4-5) and ironically refers to their willingness to entertain fools (the false apostles). The implication is that now that he counts himself as a fool, they will surely entertain him! Paul denigrates the false apostles in v. 20 in a manner that implies their charlatanism and recalls the differing attitudes towards community support which divide Paul from his opponents (11:7—15). He sarcastically proclaims that he was simply too weak to adopt the belittling tactics of his opponents (v. 2ia). This is, of course, an ironic jibe at the Corinthians' blindness in recognizing the strength of true apostleship, a blindness which is made especially evident by the accusation that Paul's bodily presence is weak (10:10). What appears to be his shame (weakness) he hopes to prove is in fact his honour (power; cf. i Cor 12:9).
(11:21^-33) The Self-Designations of Paul's Opponents The passage 11:21/7-12:10 includes the heart of the 'fool's speech'. Declaring that he is engaging in foolishness, Paul nevertheless boasts in the same terms as his opponents and insists that he shares all of their claims to authority. In the process he reveals the self-designations of his opponents. 'Hebrews,' 'Israelites', and 'descendants of Abraham' are three closely related labels pointing to a special claim of Jewish heritage (cf. Phil 3:5). It is impossible to attach a distinct significance to each term, but there may be differences of nuance. 'Hebrews' may refer primarily to ethnic descent, but also to geographical origin and familiarity with Hebrew or Aramaic (cf. Acts 6:1). With 'Israelites' the focus may be somewhat more upon a religious past, heritage, and tradition (Georgi 1986: 46). The conflict between Paul and the opponents in Corinth probably involves the question of whether the charismatic basis of the apostle's authority (a direct appeal to divine experience) is sufficient in the light of the greater appeal made to tradition by the false apostles (2 COR 10:1-6). 'Descendants of Abraham' may function to legitimate the authority they claim in propounding their particular understanding of the mission they undertake among the Gentiles: Abraham's promise was to be the father of many nations (cf. Rom 4:13-18; 9:6-8; Gal 3:1618). The title 'ministers [or servants] of Christ' (diakonoi Christou),v. 23, is especially important because it represents a direct quotation of a designation that moves beyond claims concerning heritage and identity to give us a sense of how the opponents understood what they were doing (Georgi 1986: 32). The seriousness of the threat posed by the opponents may have been related to an approach and self-understanding which in many ways may have been quite similar to Paul's mission to be a minister of Christ Jesus (e.g. Rom 15:16). This
(12:1-10) Visions and Revelations of the Lord Paul continues his inappropriate boasting—his speaking like a fool (11:21)— by once again arguing that he can match any claims of status that his opponents might have. In v. i he gives the impression that he is ready to discuss the last contentious issue; he moves on to visions and revelations 'of the Lord' (probably to be understood as 'granted by the Lord': a genitive of origin; Furnish 1984: 524). That his reluctance to engage in this type of discourse is particularly great, however, is suggested by his description of his experience in the third person: T know a person in Christ...' (v. 2). Probably because of the importance attached to visions and revelations by his opponents, Paul wishes to convey the impression that such ecstatic experiences are relatively unimportant and even of no real
"49 2 CORINTHIANS
(12:11—13) Tl16 Signs of a True Apostle These verses are usually understood as the epilogue of the fool's speech (11:1— 12:13). Paul takes up the voice of the fool once again. He has had to defend his own honour, since the Corinthians have not been commending him. This is the voice of a patron who feels he has not received the honour which is his due. Maintaining the ironic tone which dominates chs. 10—13, Paul admits that he is weak (he is nothing), but at the same time he is not at all inferior to the super-apostles whom the Corinthians admire so much (11:5; 2 COR 11:5—15). Paul tells the Corinthians that they have no reason to complain since 'the signs of a true apostle' were performed adequately among them (v. 12). The reference to 'signs' (semeia) offers evidence of the existence of institutionalized norms in the community for determining true apostleship (2 COR 10:7-11). A similar focus on charismatic performance in the process of evangelization occurs in Rom 15:19 and in Gal 3:5. But Paul's admission of the importance of 'signs and wonders and mighty works' is intriguing, given his previous attempt to play down the importance of visions and revelations to his mission (12:1-10). Paul is speaking like a fool in w. 11-13, but he nevertheless may be offering an indication that charismatic phenomena were central to Paul's initial acceptance in a community, even though such wondrous deeds were subsumed by the apostle within the larger purpose of preaching the gospel of Christ (Rom 15:1819). In v. 13 Paul returns to the complaint made by the Corinthians of unfair treatment in comparison to other churches. This complaint involved the apostle's refusal to accept material support from the Corinthians (his refusal to become their client). The Corinthians argued that he did not adopt the same attitude in other places (notably Macedonia: 11:7—11; 2 COR 11:5-15). With biting sarcasm, Paul pleads for the Corinthians' forgiveness for not burdening them.
significance for ministry. Paul's mission is based on what is seen concretely in the apostle and what is heard from the apostle (w. 6—7). Paul emphasizes the nature of his dealings with church communities and his preaching of the gospel as definitive signs of his apostleship. But he nevertheless unwittingly offers here an indication of the significance of ecstatic religious experience for an early church group. The attitude towards it in this text appears to be more negative than that revealed by 5:13, where competition concerning ecstatic experience may also be in view (2 COR 5:11—19). Moreover, while Paul clearly sees a great difference between the revelation of the Lord he describes in w. 2-4 and the revelation of God's
Son which led to his becoming an apostle (Gal 1:15-16), the distinction may be less apparent to his audience. Ultimately Paul's apostleship is based upon revelation, but given the situation in Corinth he obviously feels that it is prudent instead to stress his physical (and earthly) weakness which discloses the power accorded to him by the Lord. In Paul's dispute with the opponents we can perhaps sense a trace of the difficulty of determining which charismatic experience of an apostle is authentic. In the early church writing, the Didache, attitudes towards riches on the part of itinerant charismaticsbecame animportantguidetodetermining which teachers were truly gifted (Did. 11-13). Paul tells us Ver7 li^e about the shape of his revelatory experience or what it meant; but he does announce that it could have led to elation (v. 7). He tells us he was caught up (cf i Thess 4:17) to the third heaven
(here equated with Paradise, see w. 2,4; cf. 2 Enoch 7 and Apoc. Mas. 37.5; Murphy-O'Connor 1990: 828). Other-worldly journeys were commonly described in ancient apocalyptic literature (Furnish 1984: 525—6). The mysterious quality that one would expect of such an experience is disclosed by Paul in the admission that he does not know whether the experience was in the body or out of the body (v. 3). His reference to a lack of knowledge about the event, however, may also be a way of communicating its relative unimportance. Similarly, Paul's announcement that he heard things that should never be told could be in keeping with the notion of a sealed revelation (Dan 12:4; Rev 10:4), but could also be a means of pointing to irrelevance of the event for the essence of his apostleship (Murphy-O'Connor 1990: 828). Having abandoned the role of the fool (and the parody of his opponents' tactics), Paul admits that he was prevented from boasting (or being too elated) by a thorn in the flesh, a messenger from Satan (v. 7). Most commentators have seen here a reference to a physical ailment (physical suffering is understood by Paul as a sign that Satan's power continues to influence the world; cf. 4:4; see Neyrey 1990: 167-80), but others have argued that Paul has an external enemy in mind, a non-believer or an opponent in the church (cf. 2 Cor 11:14—15; Murphy-O'Connor 1990: 828). Paul apparently prayed three times to the Lord to have the thorn removed (v. 8). The Lord responded by means of an oracle (v. 9). Grace is equated with power in v. 9 and refers to the force which sustains Paul and is disclosed in his weakness. Paul announces that it is his weakness that is the authentic source of his boasting, for it is a sign of the power of Christ dwelling within him. He offers a summary (v. 10) of the long catalogue of hardships in 11:23-8, but now explicitly states that he is content in his sufferings: these make known the paradox of his life as an apostle in imitation of Christ.
(12:14-13:10) Concluding Defence
(12:14-18) Suspicions of Wrongdoing concerning the Collection Having appealed to the Corinthians for obedience in 10:1—18, and having supported that appeal with the 'fool's speech' in 11:1—12:13, Paul now states his intention to come to Corinth a third time and offers further arguments in support of his position. These verses have played a part in theories concerning the chronology of the letter fragments of 2 Corinthians. The passage 7:4—16 suggests that at the time of composition of chs. 1-9, Titus had only been to Corinth once, while it appears that by the time w. 14-18 were composed he had made a second visit. This implies that chs. 10—13 came later. Paul's third visit (v. 14; cf. 13:1) appears to be the visit that he had planned (1:16) but had postponed after the second painful visit (2:1; cf. 9:4). During the first visit the community was founded. In w. 14—16 Paul restates a principle that he defended vigorously in 11:7—11 and alluded to sarcastically in 12:13: he will continue to support himself while he is with the Corinthians (2 COR 11:5-15). Paul presents this as the natural consequence of his parental relationship with the Corinthians and of his great love for them (w. 14—15; cf. i Cor 4:15). But the practical application of this principle in the community involves the acceptance of Paul as patron of the community and the obligation to honour him with their love. There were probably Corinthians who felt that the reverse should take place; they wished Paul to act as their
2 CORINTHIANS 1150
in non-diaspora Judaism the rule was often used to support the requirement that those suspected ofwrongdoing were to be warned carefully of the possibility of punishment (van Vliet 1958: 53-62; Furnish 1984: 575). In stressing his multiple previous warnings, Paul apparently feels that he has met the criteria of the rule. There is an element of foreboding in his warning that he will not be lenient. He promises proof of Christ speaking in him (2:17; 5:20; 12:19) in me form of punishment of the Corinthians. The explanation of the meaning of the Christ event in v. 4 is in keeping with credal statements in Paul's other letters (e.g. Rom 1:4): Christ was crucified in weakness but raised up to live by the power of God. Paul's union with Christ means that his life is shaped by the power of God in the same way. He shares Christ's weakness, but in dealing with the Corinthians, he will live with him' by the power of God. w. 3-4 offer a good illustration of theology finding expression in concrete human interaction. The theology of the cross functions to support censure in community ethics and discipline (2 COR 4:7-15).
client and accept their gifts of material support (2 COR 8:1624). But Paul feels that this would be as ridiculous a scenario as children lay[ing] up' (saving) for their parents. In w. 16—18 Paul repeats a charge of deceitful trickery brought against him by the Corinthians and defends himself against it (cf 2 Cor 4:2). The discussion of the trip made by Titus and the brother recalls the description of the arrangements made by Paul for the impending visit in chs. 8-9. Because Paul seems so confident of his loyalty as a co-worker who accompanied Titus, the brother mentioned in v. 18 is most likely Paul's representative referred to in 8:22 and not the brother who was apparently appointed by the churches to oversee the handling of the collection as a kind of external auditor (8:18-19; 2 COR 8:1624). w. 14—18 present information which acts as an important complementtothematerialinchs. 8—9: it offers unmistakable evidence that Paul was suspected ofwrongdoing with respectto the collection and his delicate handling of the situation in chs. 8—9 should be read in that light. But the manner in which reference to the collection is fused with suspicions concerning Paul's refusal to accept material support in w. 14-18 leads to further information about the precise nature of the suspicions of the Corinthians concerning Paul and money. Paul was probably suspected of keeping for himself some of the money that he is collecting for Jerusalem. In short, he was being accused of fraud (Furnish 1988: 1202). Paul brings the discussion of the matter to a close with rhetorical questions which he is sure will highlight his innocence (v. 18).
(13:5—10) The Purpose of Paul's Letter Paul's tone in this section is more conciliatory than in the exhortations in 13:14, but v. 10 makes it clear that the same message frames both passages: severe discipline of the Corinthian community is a distinct possibility. Paul states, however, that he hopes that drastic measures will not be necessary and locates the purpose of his letter in the prevention of such measures. Paul certainly feels that he has been endowed with divine power in his dealings with the Corinthians (13:4), but qualifies the authority given to him by Christ in a way that ties his treatment of the Corinthians to the central goal of his mission. Paul has been given authority to build up (v. 10; cf. 12:19) an(^ n°t to tear it down (an almost identical phrase is found in 10:8; cf. 2 COR 10:7-11). The notion of 'upbuilding' (oikodome) occurs frequently in the Corinthian correspondence and refers to the harmonious development of the church in accordance with God's designs (e.g. i Cor 3:9 and 14:26). We can only imagine the great sense of failure and defeat that Paul would have experienced if things did not turn out as he had hoped in Corinth and there had been a tearing down (or destruction, kathairesis; cf. 10:4). There are, in fact, several indications throughout w. 5-9 that Paul's sense of his own apostleship is bound up with the behaviour of the Corinthians. In an atmosphere of comparisons between apostles and challenges to apostolic authority, Paul invites the Corinthians to test themselves: have they displayed the faith that flows from the presence of Jesus among them? The implication seems to be that if they pass the test, Paul will also avoid failure (w. 5-6). Nevertheless, to the end, Paul insists that what is most important is not the visibility of his apostolic credentials but the fact that he has acted in accordance with the truth of the gospel (w. 7-8; cf. 4:2; 6:7). The apostle may be weak, and the Corinthians may even continue to view him as weak, as long as the Corinthians are strong; that is, strong in faith but not strong in self-importance. The relationship between apostle and community reflects the meaning of the cross. In weakness and suffering, strength and salvation are revealed. The announcement of the purpose of Paul's letter in v. 10 seems incompatible with chs. 1-9 and is often viewed as an indication that chs. 10—13 should be viewed as a separate letter.
(12:19—21) The Motives of Paul's Defence Paul now seeks to counter the impression that he has been engaging solely in a personal defence based on past events and has not been addressing important matters of community well-being. He insists that he has in fact been working for the sake of building up the community because he fears that a complete breakdown of the relationship between himself and the community will occur when he arrives (w. 19—20). Given that Paul has been responding to specific problems having to do with the false apostles and with community loyalty from 10:1 until now, it is surprising to hear him frame the situation in terms of a general problem with improper behaviour ranging from quarrelling to sexual immorality (w. 20—1). The list of vices in v. 20 appears to be conventional (cf. Gal 5:20; Murphy-O'Connor 1990: 828). While Corinth has a history of sexual immorality (i Cor 5:1—5; cf. i Cor 6:15—16), the problem does not surface elsewhere in 2 Corinthians. However, Jews in the Roman world frequently drew attention to sexual immorality in attempts to describe the sin and alienation in the pagan world (Newton 1985:1023). It may be that Paul is aiming to cast the sin of the Corinthians in the most negative terms. Behind w. 20—1 may lie an attempt on the part of the apostle to describe the consequences of the community's alienation from him as devastating. With all hope lost, there will be nothing left to do but mourn.
(13:1—4) The Serious Consequences of Disobedience At first glance it may appear that the legal statement requiring two or three witnesses for a charge refers to requirements to substantiate charges against Paul (12:16). However, the rule—a citation of Deut 19:15—concerns the establishment of proper criteria for conviction and punishment (cf. Deut 19:15—21; Mt 18:16), and this fits equally well with w. 3-4 where Paul warns the community of the possibility of punitive action. Moreover,
2 CORINTHIANS
(1988), '2 Corinthians', J. L. Mays (ed.), HBC (San Francisco: Harper £ Row), 1190-203. Garrett, S. R. (1995), 'Paul's Thorn and Cultural Models of Affliction',
The third visit (12:14; I3:I) seems to be the one Paul intended to make after the Corinthians' contribution to the collection had been gathered (9:3—5). By the time of composition ofchs. 10—13 the relationship between the Corinthians and the community had deteriorated to such an extentthat Paul probably wondered whether the church would make a contribution at all and he felt a harsh letter was required to set matters straight. The reference to the people of both Macedonia and Achaia (Corinth was the capital of this province) making a generous contribution to the poor in Jerusalem (Rom 15:25—6) suggests that the letter did indeed achieve its purpose (Furnish 1988:1202).
in L. White and O. Yarbrough (eds.), The Social World of the First Christians: Essays in Honour of Wayne Meeks (Minneapolis: Fortress), 82-99. Georgi, D. (1986), The Opponents of Paul in Second Corinthians (Phila-
delphia: Fortress). Hock, R. F. (1980), The Social Context of Paul's Ministry: Tentmaking
and Apostleship (Philadelphia: Fortress). Holmberg, B. (1980), Paul and Power: The Structure of Authority in the
Primitive Church as Reflected in the Pauline Epistles (Philadelphia: Fortress). MacDonald, M. Y. (1988), The Pauline Churches: A Socio-Historical
Conclusion: Greetings and Benediction (13:11-13)
Study of Institutionalization in the Pauline and Deutero-Pauline Writings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). MacMullen, R. (1984), Christianizing the Roman Empire: A. D. 100—400
Assuming the generally held view that 2 Corinthians harmonizes at least two separate letters (chs. 1—9; 10—13), it is n°t dear
(New Haven: Yale University Press). Marshall, P. (1987), Enmity in Corinth: Social Conventions in Paul's
which of the fragments originally included these verses. In addition, different translations reflect a slightly different numbering of verses. The NRSV has three verses, but some translations break the passage down into four verses, numbering 'All the saints greet you' as v. 13. 'Saints' is a general term for believers (cf. 2 COR 1:1-2), but here probably refers to the saints of Macedonia, the place where 2 Corinthians (or much of the letter) was composed (7:5; cf. 2:12—13; ^:I> 9:2)- The call to greet one another with a holy kiss occurs several times in Paul's letters (e.g. Rom 16:16; i Cor 16:20; i Thess 5:26). It recalls the ritual kiss during church gatherings, which was an intimate expression of the fellowship experienced in early church groups (Meeks 1984: 109). The benediction in v. 13 is longer than usual and resembles Eph 6:23-4. The reference to the Lord Jesus Christ, God, and the Holy Spirit should not be understood as a presentation of the formal doctrine of the trinity (Thrall 1965: 183).
Relations with the Corinthians (Tubingen: Mohr). Martin, D. B. (1990), Slavery as Salvation: The Metaphor of Slavery in
Pauline Christianity (New Haven: Yale University Press). Matthews, S. (1994), '2 Corinthians', in E. S. Fiorenza (ed.), Searching
the Scriptures, ii. A Feminist Commentary (New York: Crossroad), 196-217. Meeks, W. (1983), The First Urban Christians (New Haven: Yale Uni-
versity Press). Mitchell, M. M. (1991), Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation (Tubin-
gen: Mohr). Murphy-O'Connor, J. (1990), "The Second Letter to the Corinthians',
NJBC 816-29.
(1991), The Theology of the Second Letter to the Corinthians (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Newton, M. (1985), The Concept of Purity at Qumran and in the Letters of
Paul (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Neyrey, J. H. (1990), Paul, in Other Words: A Cultural Reading of his
Letters (Louisville, Ky.: Westminster/John Knox).
(1993), 'Nudity', in J. Pilch and B. Malina (eds.), Biblical Social Values and Their Meaning (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson), 119—25. Plevnik, J. (1993), 'Honour/Shame', in J. Pilch and B. Malina (eds.),
Barrett, C. K. (1971), 'Paul's Opponents in II Corinthians', NTS 17:
Biblical Social Values and Their Meaning (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson), 95—104. Reese, J. M. (1993), 'Assertiveness', in J. Pilch and B. Malina (eds.),
233-54- (1973), A Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (London: A. £ C. Black). Bassler, J. M. (1992), '2 Corinthians', in C. Newsoni and S. Ringe
Biblical Social Values and Their Meaning (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson), 9—11. Sanders, E. P. (1983), Paul, the Law, and thejewish People (Philadelphia:
(eds.), The Women's Bible Commentary (Louisville, Ky.: Westminster/ John Knox), 330-2. Belleville, L. L. (1993), 'Tradition or Creation? Paul's Use of the Exodus
Fortress). Schiitz, J. H. (1975), Paul and the Anatomy of Apostolic Power (Cam-
34 Tradition in 2 Corinthians 3.7-18', in C. Evans and J. Sanders (eds.), Paul and the Scriptures of Israel (Sheffield: JSOT), 165—85. Berger, P. L., and Luckmann, T. (1981), The Social Construction of
bridge: Cambridge University Press). Stockhausen, C. K. (1993), '2 Corinthians 3 and the Principles of
Pauline Exegesis', in C. Evans and J. Sanders (eds.), Paul and the Scriptures of Israel (Sheffield: JSOT), 143—64. Theissen, G. (1982), The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity: Essays on
Reality (Harmondsworth: Penguin). Betz, H. D. (1973), '2 Cor 6:14-7:1: An Anti-Pauline Fragment?' JBL
92: 88-108. (1985), 2 Corinthians 8 and 9: A Commentary on Two Administrative Letters of the Apostle Paul, Hermeneia (Philadelphia: Fortress).
Corinth (Philadelphia: Fortress). Thrall, M. E. (1965), / and II Corinthians, CBC (Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press).
(1992), D. Freedman (ed.), 'Second Epistle to the Corinthians', ABD, i. 1148-54. Chow, J. K. (1992), Patronage and Power: A Study of Social Networks in
(1980), 'Super-Apostles, Servants of Christ, and Servants of Satan', JSNT 6: 42-57. van Vliet, H. (1958), No Single Testimony: A Study on the Adoption of the
Corinth (Sheffield: JSOT). Crafton, J. A. (1990), The Agency of the Apostle: A Dramatistic Analysis of
Law of Deut. 19:15 Par. into the New Testament, Studia Theologica Rheno-Traiectina, 4 (Utrecht: Kemink & Zoon). Witherington III, B. (1995), Conflict and Community in Corinth: A
Paul's Response to Conflict in 2 Corinthians (Sheffield: JSOT). Danker, F. W. (1989), // Corinthians (Minneapolis: Augsburg). Fitzgerald, J. T. (1988), Cracks in an Earthen Vessel: An Examination of
Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on i and 2 Corinthians (Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans). Young, F., and Ford, D. F. (1987), Meaning and Truth in 2 Corinthians
the Catalogues of Hardships in the Corinthian Correspondence (Atlanta: Scholars Press). Furnish, V. P. (1984), II Corinthians, AB (Garden City NY: Doubleday).
(Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans).
67. Galatians G. N. STANTON
his initial relationship with the Galatian Christians is reflected in several passages (e.g. 3:15; 4:12-20; 6:1).
A. Paul and the Galatian Churches. 1. Galatians was sent as a circular letter to a group of churches in Galatia, where it would have been read aloud, perhaps on several occasions in the context of worship (1:2). This is the most passionate of Paul's letters; only 2 Cor 10—13 is Partly comparable. There has never been any doubt about the authorship of Galatians: here we meet Paul's pugnacious defence of'the truth of the gospel' (2:5), as well as his exposition of the significance of God's disclosure of Jesus Christ (1:12). Paul's letter is carefully crafted, though in places the modern reader wishes he had clarified some of his statements. We do not know whether Paul's attempt to fend off the threat of the agitators who had infiltrated the Galatian churches met with immediate success. In the long run, however, Paul was successful: his insistence that Gentiles need not observe the whole Mosaic law (including circumcision) as an integral part of their commitment to Christ won the day, but the debates on this issue rumbled on in some circles well into the latter part of the second century (cf Justin Martyr, Dialogue, 47), and even occasionally thereafter.
2. At some point after Paul had left Galatia, agitators from elsewhere had undermined some of his central convictions by confusing the Galatians and 'pervert[ing] the gospel of Christ' (1:7). The clearest statements concerning the agitators' 'false teaching' are in 4:10, 5:7—12, and 6:12—13, though parts of those verses are difficult to interpret. The agitators are encouraging the Galatian Christians to observe the Jewish 'special days, and months, and seasons, and years' (4:10). They themselves are Jews who have become Christians; they have been urging the Galatian Gentile Christians to be circumcised, i.e. to become full proselytes to Judaism as part of their commitment to the gospel of Christ (6:12-13). Paul believes that they have been selective in their approach, i.e. they have not insisted that the Galatians observe all the Mosaic commandments (4:3).
3. It is possible to glean a little more about the claims of the agitators by 'mirror-reading' some passages in Galatians. But as Barclay (1987) has rightly emphasized, mirror-reading is a hazardous operation. Not all Paul's statements are necessarily direct refutations of the claims of the agitators, though some scholars have assumed too readily that this is the case. Hence many questions have to be left open. For example, it is difficult to be confident about the relationship of the agitators to the 'false believers' who caused havoc among the Jerusalem Christians (2:3—6) and to 'the certain people from James' (2:12).
2. In places Paul uses strong language which must have made some of the first listeners to this letter wince (cf. 3:1; 4:30; 5:12). Occasional scholarly attempts to 'improve' Paul's line of argument by removing some verses as later nonPauline additions have not won support. We can be confident that the letter we have is very similar to the letter Paul dictated to an amanuensis before adding the final section in his own handwriting (cf. 6:11). In view of the extent to which some of Paul's key points are expressed more judiciously in some of his later letters, it is perhaps surprising that the early scribes who copied it did not make more strenuous efforts to harmonize it with the 'later', more moderate Paul.
4. Since Paul and the agitators shared a number of convictions, it is inappropriate to refer to them as Paul's 'opponents'. They both seem to have used the term 'gospel' to refer to Christian proclamation (1:6—7). Like Paul, they believed that Jesus the Messiah was the fulfilment of the promises of Scripture. In all probability, in 4:21-31 Paul is responding to their interpretation of key passages in Genesis.
3. Galatians was written to quite specific circumstances which are difficult to reconstruct in detail, though the main issues at stake are clear. Paul's dispute with the agitators elicited some of his most profound theological statements. Only Romans has made a greater impact on later Christian thinkers and believers. In modern times Galatians has surpassed even Romans in the role it has played in reconstructions of the history of earliest Christianity. Interpretation of Paul's accounts of the Jerusalem 'council'
5. By mirror-reading 5:13—6:10 some scholars have claimed that Paul is opposing a second group in the Galatian churches, antinomians or Gnostics who have distorted Paul's proclamation of Christian freedom. However, in this section of his letter, Paul is far more concerned with general ethical principles than with false views. Paul is underlining two convictions: faith must be worked out in love (5:6); freedom is not an opportunity for self-indulgence, but for love of one another which is a bond as close as slavery (5:13).
(2:1-10) and of his clash with Peter at Antioch (2:11-14) is
always prominent in discussion of the tensions within early Christianity.
C. The Recipients. 1. Where were the Galatian churches located? Scholarly opinion continues to be evenly divided between advocates of the 'north' and the 'south' Galatia theories. The former defend the traditional view that the recipients of this letter were ethnic Galatians (Galatai, Celts, see 3.1) who lived in the north of the Roman province; the Galatian churches were near modern Ankara. The latter note that in Paul's day the Roman province of Galatia stretched from Pontus on the Black Sea to Pamphylia on the Mediterranean
B. The Galatian Crisis. 1. In order to unravel Paul's main lines of argument in this letter, it is necessary to have some appreciation of the circumstances that led to its composition. Paul had preached in Galatia once (or possibly twice—see 4:13) before he wrote this letter. His initial visit was related to 'a physical infirmity' he experienced (4:13). Probably as the result of his ministry, house-churches were established. In spite of Paul's displeasure at the later turn of events, the warmth of
"53 GALATIANS
coast, and insist that Paul wrote to churches at Antioch, Lystra, and Derbe in the south.
elaborates this opening formula, but only in Romans 1:1-6 is this done at greater length than in Galatians.
2. A decision is important for reconstruction of Paul's missionary journeys and career, but not for the interpretation of this letter. See Longenecker (1990: bdii-kviii), for a full discussion.
Paul's comments on his apostleship are striking. In numerous passages in his letters Paul refers to himself in positive terms as an apostle ('one who has been sent'). In v. i, however, Paul stresses that his apostleship is not based on a 'human commission', nor has he been sent 'from human authorities'. Is this a direct response to his opponents in Galatia right at the outset of the letter? Have they been undermining Paul's authority by referring to its purely human origin, perhaps stressing that Paul had been sent as an apostle (merely) by the church at Antioch (Acts 13:1-3)? This maybe the case, but as we noted above, Paul's forceful statements are not all to be read as direct responses to the jibes of his opponents. Paul emphasizes that he has been sent to the Galatian churches as an apostle by Jesus Christ and God the Father. God has shown that he is the Father of Jesus Christ by raising him to life; in w. 3—4 God is the Father of Christians ('our Father').
D. Date. Dates proposed range from 49 to 58 CE. If Paul wrote in 49 or 50, Galatians would be the earliest of his letters. If Paul wrote towards the end of the 503, Galatians was written not long before Romans. Dating Galatians is closely related to a decision on two major questions: the location of the Galatian churches, and the relationship of Gal 2:1—10 to Acts. If, as seems likely, Paul's account of his visit to Jerusalem in 2:1-10 is his equivalent of Luke's account of the Jerusalem council in Acts 15, then Galatians was written at some point after that event which is usually dated to between 49 and 51 CE. (See further GAL 2:1—10 and IPC 81.4.) The extent of the development in Paul's thinking between Galatians and Romans is only one of several issues that depend on the date one assigns to this letter. However, a decision cannot be made with any degree of confidence.
In the opening phrases of several of his letters Paul refers to individual co-workers; see, for example i Cor 1:1, Sosthenes; 2 Cor 1:1, Timothy. In v. 2 Paul refers to an unnamed group of co-workers. The phrase, 'God's family', correctly alludes to the presence of men and women in the group, for in a context such as this, the Greek word addphoi, literally 'brothers', includes 'sisters'.
E. Genre. Of rather more importance for the exegesis of this letter is its literary genre, a question that has been prominent in recent discussion. Betz's theory that Galatians is an apologetic letter that presupposes the real or fictitious situation of the court of law has provoked lively debate. Betz (1979: 15) claims that the epistolary framework can be separated so easily 'that it appears almost as a kind of external bracket for the body of the letter'. Paul is defending himself against the accusations of his accusers before the jury that is to decide the case, i.e. the Galatians. Betz's critics acknowledge that this forensic rhetorical pattern of persuasion can be discerned in parts of chs. i and 2, but hardly in the letter as a whole. Some claim that Galatians is an example of deliberative rhetoric, i.e. that Paul is persuading the Galatians not to accept the claims of the agitators. While this is clearly the case in 1:6-9 and 6:12—16, this reading does not do justice to many other parts of the letter. The debate has been assessed critically by Kern (1998) who calls in question the various attempts to interpret Galatians in the light of Graeco-Roman rhetorical handbooks. Paul uses several Graeco-Roman and Jewish patterns of persuasion in what is, after all, an impassioned fetter rather than a rhetorical discourse.
Paul states that he is writing to the churches of Galatia. As noted above, it is not easy to be certain about their precise geographical location. Paul's other letters were written to individual churches, though they may soon have circulated more widely. Like i Peter (cf 1:1), Galatians was intended to be a circular letter to a group of churches probably scattered over a wide area.
In v. 4 Paul makes three comments about the significance of the death of Christ, (i) In Paul's day many Jews believed that the death of a righteous man as a martyr would expiate the sins of others (see especially 4 Mace). Here the death of Christ is linked to this conviction in what several scholars have claimed is a pre-Pauline formula. The strongest indication that this may have been the case is the use of'sins', whereas Paul himself prefers the singular, 'sin'. (2) In what may be Paul's own filling out of an early credal statement, the death of Christ is seen as a release 'from the present evil age'. Paul implies that there is a 'coming age' which he refers to in 6:15 as 'the new creation'. This contrast between two 'ages' is characteristic of apocalyptic thought. (3) Christ's giving up of his life for our release is in accordance with the will of God. 'The death of the Son is therefore a sacrifice enacted both by him and by God; and as such it breaks the mold of the old sacrificial system. The cross, that is to say, is not a sacrifice human beings make to God; it is fundamentally God's act, and as such the inversion of the sacrificial system.' (Martyn 1997: 91) Paul concludes his extended opening greetings with a traditional doxology (v. 5). He does not do this in his other letters. Perhaps he does so here in the knowledge that his circular letter will be read in the churches in Galatia in the context of worship.
F. Structure. The introduction (1:1—9) an(^ the conclusion (6:11-18) are clearly marked. There are three main sections in the letter. From 1:10 to 2:21 Paul relates the parts of his own story that are relevant to his overall purposes. The central arguments of the letter start at 3:1, but it is not easy to decide whether they end at 4:11,4:30, or 5:1. The ethical exhortations in the third main section end at 6:10.
Introduction (1:1-9)
(1:1-5) Opening Greetings The literary form of the opening words is found in nearly all NT and early Christian letters: 'writer to addressees, greetings': 'Paul... to the churches of Galatia, grace to you and peace...' As in his other letters, Paul
(1:6—9) Rebuke Immediately after the opening greetings in all Paul's other letters a thanksgiving to God for the readers is
GALATIANS 1154
sion of tradition. In 1:12 Paul seems to contradict himself when he insists that he received the gospel through a revelation of Christ and not as transmitted tradition. But the contradiction is more apparent than real: the gospel does have central themes which can be passed on from one person to another (cf. i Cor 15:3—5), but ultimately it is God's act of disclosure or revelation.
included. Thanksgiving is mentioned by Paul more often, line for line, than by any other Hellenistic author, pagan or Christian (O'Brien 1977). In stark contrast to Paul's other letters, however, there is not even a hint of a note of thanksgiving in Galatians. But there is one important point of similarity here with the other letters: here too the main theme of Galatians is introduced in the sentences that follow the opening greetings.
Paul's first word after the initial greetings, thaumazo, 'I am astonished' must have sent a shudder through the Galatian congregations when they heard it read, for they would have expected a thanksgiving, v. 6 includes Paul's only use of the verb metatithemi, 'desert'; the closest parallels in Hellenistic writers refer to the desertion of one philosophical school for another. Here, however, the context is different: Paul is amazed that the Galatians are deserting 'the one who called you', clearly not Paul himself, but God whose call is 'in grace'. Although NRSV reads 'in the grace of Christ', 'of Christ' is not found in some early M S S; it is more likely to have been a later scribal explanatory addition than an omission. The Galatians' desertion has happened 'quickly', perhaps soon after the arrival of the agitators. The verbs in w. 6-7 are in the present tense, confirming that the Galatians' apostasy is still happening as Paul writes.
Paul's Story (1:10-2:21)
(1:10—12) Proclamation of the Gospel Does v. 10 belong with w. 8-9? The word 'for' (gar) in the Greek suggests this; Dunn (1993: 48) (among others) takes v. 10 in this way. However, gar is often so weak that it need not be translated—it is ignored in the NRSV. If so, then v. 10 may be read as the beginning of a lengthy section of the letter which runs as far as 2:21.
The NRSV translation of v. 10 implies a strong contrast between the accusation against Paul that he uses rhetoric to curry favour with his audience, and Paul's own claim that in his proclamation of the gospel he seeks only God's approval. This interpretation seems to be confirmed by the strikingly similar line of argument in i Thess 2:4—6. However, some commentators translate the Greek verb peitho in its literal sense as 'persuade', and take both parts of the opening sentence of v. 10 in a negative sense: Paul is rejecting his opponents' suggestion that he seeks to persuade his audience by the force of his rhetoric, and also their claim that he is persuading God to accept Gentiles on easier terms. The final sentence of v. 10 underlines Paul's rejection of crowd-pleasing rhetoric. Paul's many references to enslavement in this letter are usually negative, but this first reference is positive: Paul insists that he is a slave of Christ.
Paul claims that the Galatians are 'turning to a different gospel', but he immediately denies that there is another gospel. The term 'gospel' has deep roots both in the GraecoRoman world and in Isaiah. It may have been associated by the Galatians with the 'glad tidings' brought by a military victory or the birth of an emperor. In several key passages in Isaiah 40:9, 52:7, 61:1) the verb 'to proclaim good news' is used. Jesus seems to have applied the same phraseology to his own proclamation of God's coming kingly rule (e.g. Mt 11:5 n Lk 7:22; Lk 4:16-21). Soon after Easter the noun is used as a Christian technical term for 'God's good news about Jesus Christ'. For Paul, there can be only one gospel (though see GAL 2:7); if his opponents use that term, they are perverting God's good news.
'For I want you to know' at the beginning of v. n is a formula Paul uses elsewhere (e.g. i Cor 12:3; 15:1) to underline the importance of what follows. In spite of the strongly polemical tone of this letter, Paul refers here to the recipients as 'brothers and sisters', perhaps as a conciliatory gesture. Paul's firm threefold denial in nc and 12 that his gospel has merely human origins is a filling out of 1:1, and probably a direct response to the jibes of his opponents. Paul's positive statement about the origin of his gospel at the end of v. 12 is one of the most important in the whole letter: it is expanded and expounded in the autobiographical sketch that follows. Paul insists that he received the gospel 'through a revelation (apokalypsis) of Jesus Christ'. This translation preserves the ambiguity of the Greek which can be construed either as 'Jesus Christ's disclosure of the gospel' or as 'God's disclosure of Jesus Christ as the content of the gospel'. The latter is preferable, especially in view of the filling out of v. 12 in w. 15-16. The key noun in v. 12, apokalypsis is usually understood in the light of apocalyptic writings where it often refers to the unveiling of something or someone previously hidden, i.e. the 'revelation' or 'disclosure' of Jesus Christ. While not denying the validity of this traditional interpretation, Martyn (1997: 144) has argued forcefully that God's unveiling of Christ is 'basically qualified by the assertion that apocalypse is the invasive act that was carried out by God when he sent Christ and Christ's Spirit into the world and into human hearts' (3:23; 4:4, 6).
In v. 7 Paul speaks openly about the agitators for the first time. Instead of naming them, he refers to them with disdain as 'some people'. 'There are some who are confusing you' is too weak, as is REB's 'there are some who unsettle your minds'. The same verb tarasso is used in Gal 5:10 (cf also Acts 15:24) with the sense 'intimidate': the Galatians are being frightened out of their wits by the troublemakers who, from Paul's perspective, want to pervert the gospel. In the opening phrase of v. 8 (and again in v. 9) Paulusestheplural'we'.Whilethiscould be an editorial 'we', and simply a reference to Paul himself, Paul is probably associating his co-workers with his proclamation (cf. Gal 1:2). Paul is speaking hypothetical^: he is prepared to pronounce an anathema, God's curse, on himself (and his circle) and even on an angel-messenger from heaven if any of them should dare to proclaim a different gospel.
In v. 9 Paul throws caution to the winds and calls down an anathema on those who are now proclaiming a different gospel. The phrase, 'so I now repeat' may simply refer back to v. 8; more probably it is intended as a reminder that when he was last with the Galatians, Paul had solemnly warned them of the real risk that the gospel received by the Galatians might be undermined by others. The verb 'receive' is used here (and in i Cor 15:3) in a technical sense to refer to the careful transmis-
(1:13—17) Paul's Story, Part I When had the Galatians heard about Paul's pre-Christian way of life (v. 13)? We can only
"55 GALATIANS
In w. 15—17 a single, long, rather complicated Greek sentence is retained as one sentence in the NRSV; it fills out the argument of 1:11-12 considerably. Paul's two main points are clear, even though, as we shall see below, some of the details leave questions unanswered. He emphasizes that his dramatic call to proclaim God's Son among the Gentiles was on God's initiative as a revelation or disclosure of his Son (see A4 above); he did not make contact with any other Christians in order to seek their advice or instructions, but went off on his own to Arabia.
guess. Perhaps Paul had spoken about it on his initial visit to the Galatian churches. Or perhaps Paul knew that some information about his former life had circulated far and wide—well beyond the reports that had reached the churches of Judea to which he refers in 1:22-3. <-)r perhaps Paul had guessed or was aware that his opponents had used an account of his former way of life to undermine his authority and proclamation.
Paul's two references in w. 13 and 14 to his way of life in Judaism are the only two references to Judaism in the NT. Not
Although it has often been customary to refer to Paul's conversion experience, and thereby to imply a conversion from Judaism to Christianity, Paul's carefully chosen phrases here indicate that he himself saw matters very differently. He did not decide to convert from one religion to another; in God's own time ('when it pleased God'), God called Paul to be an apostle to the Gentiles. Paul deliberately echoes phrases from Jer 1:4—5 an(^ ^sa 49:I> 6 to refer to his call, thereby aligning himself with the Hebrew prophets.
until the writings of Ignatius half a century later do we find 'Judaism' and 'Christianity' contrasted as two 'religions'. In earlier Jewish writings (2 and 4 Mace) 'Judaism' is used to contrast the distinctive Jewish way of life with Hellenism. In v. 14 Paul underlines twice over the 'out of the ordinary' zeal with which he observed the 'traditions of his ancestors', i.e. traditional Pharisaic interpretation of the law. Perhaps Paul is glancing sideways at the insistence of his opponents in Galatia on law observance: Paul concedes that_/brmerfy he himself had made the same claims concerning the law.
Paul acknowledges that there were apostles in Jerusalem before his call, but stresses that he felt no need to defer to their authority. Instead, immediately after his call he went off to 'Arabia', the kingdom of Nabataea south of Damascus. Betz (1979: 73) notes (with references) that recent excavations have brought to light a prosperous civilization with strong Hellenistic influences that was at its peak by the time of Paul's visit. Paul may have stayed in this area for up to two years, perhaps preaching in cities such as Petra to Gentiles already sympathetic to Judaism (so-called 'God-fearers') (so Hengel and
Paul's zeal had led him 'to persecute the church of God violently and to try to destroy it' (my tr.) The verbs are strong and in the imperfect tense: Paul's hounding of the church was not a one-off outburst, but a sustained attack which included violence. Why had followers of Christ roused Paul's ire? Some scholars have claimed that it was lax observance of the law by Christians that provoked Paul, but Paul himself does not say this. Were there Christians in the period between the Resurrection and Paul's call who did not keep the law fully? From his letters it is difficult to discern at what point Paul changed his mind about law observance; this does not seem to have happened immediately after his call on the road to Damascus. Luke does provide some relevant evidence in Acts, but it is difficult to interpret: in Luke's perspective the claim that Stephen and the Hellenists attacked the law before Paul's call was mischievous (see Acts 6:11, 13-14). So it is not as easy as some have supposed to argue that before his call Paul was in contact with Christians who did not observe the law.
Schwemer 1997: 127). This is a plausible historical reconstruction, but Paul tells us much less about his visit to Arabia than we would like to know.
At the end ofv. 17 Paul reveals that he returned to Damascus following his stay in Arabia, thus implying that it was in or near Damascus that he experienced God's call. Although readers of Acts are told three times and with vivid details (9:3; 22:6; 26:12) that Paul experienced God's call near Damascus, Paul himself tells us much less in w. 15—17, for his concerns in this letter are different. He focuses on his call to be an apostle to the Gentiles as God's initiative, and on his avoidance of those who might have been 'human sources' (cf. 1:12) for his gospel.
It is more likely that early Christological claims, especially concerning the Messiahship of Jesus, were the trigger for the violence Paul used against 'the church of God'. Christians were claiming that a man crucified recently as a criminal was God's Messiah, but Paul knew all too well that such a person stood under the curse of the law (Gal 3:13). Hence Paul discerned that proclamation of a crucified Messiah was implicitly a threat to the law, though even after his call as apostle to the Gentiles it seems to have taken him some time to work out the radical implications of this conclusion.
(1:18-24) Paul's Story, Part II: Visit to Jerusalem When did Paul go up to Jerusalem—three years after his return to Damascus, or three years after his initial call? Most scholars prefer the latter, though the former is not impossible. The NRSV translates the key verb historesai which refers to the purpose of Paul's visit to Jerusalem as 'visit', while the GNB translates 'obtain information from'. From the context 'visit' is preferable; if Paul had conceded that he obtained information from Cephas (the Aramaic form of Peter) he would have offered a hostage to fortune. No doubt during the period Paul spent as Cephas's house guest in Jerusalem he did gain some information about the life and teaching of Jesus, but from Paul's perspective that did not mean that he was dependent on Cephas for his understanding of the gospel. Some scholars have suggested that during this visit to Jerusalem Paul reached the agreement with Peter that is referred to in 2:7, but that is unlikely.
Paul does not tell his readers the location of the churches he persecuted. The phrase, 'the church (assembly) of God' is striking. This very early Christian self-designation echoes the OT references to Israel as 'the assembly of Yahweh'. Although both synagoge and ekklesia are used in the LXX to translate the Hebrew phrase, there is no evidence that ekklesia was ever applied to the Jewish community in a given place (Meeks 1983: 80). So the early Christian use of the term ekklesia was one way Christians differentiated themselves from local Jewish communities. In retaining the phrase 'of God', Paul concedes that his persecution of the church was an attack on God.
GALATIANS 1156
Acts 15 should be used with great care by the interpreter of Gal 2:1—10.
Paul is adamant about his independence from the leaders of the Jerusalem church. In v. 20 he confirms the accuracy of his autobiographical sketch with an oath. None the less it is important to bear in mind that Paul's purpose is not primarily to set out his story with chronological precision. His sketch is selective, for it is designed to rebut the claims of his opponents. Hence his repeated insistence (cf w. 17, 19) that with the exception of Cephas, he did not meet any of the other Jerusalem apostles. In igfc Paul adds a further exception, James the Lord's brother who is almost certainly referred to here as an apostle. However, the Greek may mean that Paul did not see any apostle (apart from Cephas)—though he did see James.
'After 14 years' probably refers to Paul's call (1:15—16) rather than his visit to Cephas (1:18-19). Paul is accompanied by Barnabas who is portrayed in 2:13 as a leader in the church at Antioch, as he is in Acts 14:26—8. So Paul and Barnabas probably travelled to Jerusalem as leaders of the church in Antioch, even though, for whatever reason, Paul does not state this explicitly. Paul emphasizes that the journey was undertaken at God'sbehest, 'in response to a revelation' (v. 2), i.e. not as the result of the anxieties or the decision of the church in Antioch.