Talk:First Epistle to the Corinthians

Untitled
I son't see the point of the photograph. A Georgian (talk) 17:25, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

The four-part division is arbitrary and interferes with discussing the actual content. --Wetman 22:14, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

The textual criticism is questionable. The comment that most scholars don't attribute Timothy 1 and 2 to Paul is misleading. An appeal to "most scholars" is not verifyable. Many New Testament scholars (including Ben Witherington III) argue for authorship from within Paul's inner circle of associates (that is on Paul's behalf and with Paul's direction). Other scholars attribute the text directly to Paul's hand. Either way, it is clear that there is not unanimity among scholars.

Outline cleanup
Since the previous outline was so bad, I started from scratch. Here's the original stuff if someone wants to reintroduce it. --JBJ830726 23:00, 1 April 2006 (UTC)


 * 1) The apostle deals with the subject of the lamentable divisions and party strifes that had arisen among them (chs. 1–4).
 * 2) He next treats of a case of incest that had become notorious among them, and of members of the church who had sued one another, to be judged in a court of law rather than before the saints of the Christian community, and of fornication (chs. 5–6).
 * 3) In the third part, he discusses various questions of doctrine and Christian ethics, in reply to certain communications they had made to him. Paul discusses marriage and the preferable state of continence, the irrelevance of circumcision, the eating of meats that have been offered to an idol, the necessities of a woman covering her head and a man uncovering his, and other particular matters. Chapter 9 is a self-defense. Among other things this section is the most thorough discussion of spiritual gifts, including prophecy and glossolalia, in the entire New Testament. Paul does not condemn them but urges their orderly use, and also contrasts them with the higher spiritual gifts of faith, hope and love. Paul also rectifies certain flagrant abuses regarding the celebration of the Eucharist (chs. 7–14).

The verses 14:33-34 deal with the role and behavior of women in the church, that women are to keep silent, and are regarded by some to be an interpolation written by someone other than Paul. Some believe that the topic of line 33, of prophesying, appears to be disrupted by the dialogue concerning women, only to be picked up again at line 14:36. Further, these restrictions against women's authority mirror the language and tone of similar restrictions in First Timothy, which is considered by most scholars to be of non-Pauline origin.
 * 1) The concluding part (chs. 15–16) contains an elaborate defense of the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, which had been called into question by some among them, followed by some general instructions, intimations, and greetings.


 * I slightly changed the reference so the link does now point directly to the list on NETBible _> MonstaPro:Talk:Contrib. 14:50, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

we missed an important point in this article. Paul was questioing thwm why the corinthian church not believing jesus resurrection. I think he is communicating with the Jewish chritian churth who denies resurrection ot divinity of Jesus —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.147.0.172 (talk) 11:47, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Bible Translation
Is there any possibility of using a more scholarly, inclusive language and modern Bible source? The KJV/AV Bible is hardly a suitable source for serious Theological study

A pretty thorough exegesis has been added based on a new translation. I would not be so hard on the KJV, though, its shortcomings have more to do with the manuscripts available at the time than with its precision, which is usually excellent, and sometimes preferable to, say, the RSV. 74.184.50.87 (talk) 16:01, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I would be hard on the KJV, considering that it was not a translation to begin with. Taking the Geneva Bible and removing notes does not constitute a translation. Plus, to say its precision is excellent assumes that word-for-word translations are appropriate, when in fact all discourse analysis and communication study says that only a meaning-for-meaning translation of any text can be faithful to an original message. Covinben (talk) 21:42, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Of the four quotes at the start of the article ("all things to all men" (9:22), "without love, I am nothing" (13:2), "through a glass, darkly" (13:12), and "when I was a child, I spoke as a child, I felt as a child, I thought as a child" (13:11).), only two are from the KJV. In the KJV, 1 Cor 13:2 has "have not charity" rather than "without love", and 1 Cor 13:11 has "spake... understood... thought" instead of "spoke... felt... thought". (KJV text for comparison here: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2013&version=KJV)WikiwikiwikiwikiWildWildWest (talk) 21:29, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Role of Women in the church
1 Corinthians 7:3-5 (New International Version)

3The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. 5Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.

Should the above controversial passage noted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.144.25.175 (talk) 04:00, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to see the information about verses 14:33-34 (the role and behavior of women in the church) incorporated in the article. I don't have online references but I listened to a lecture series on CD ("The New Testament," by Bart Ehrman, ISBN 1-56585-366-0) where he relates the same information as in the original outline. He also says that it comes after verse 40 in some manuscripts and that it may have originally been a margin note that a scribe somewhere along the way added to the text.

Why was the contribution made by 74.218.82.170 reverted by Neutralle? A Georgian (talk) 16:46, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Proverb
1 Corinthians 9:22 reads, "To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, that I may by all means save some."

St. Paul's above explanation of his philosophy for winning converts has since acquired a pejorative connotation: today it is more often said that trying to be "all things to all men" is not desirable.[*"All things to all men" at phrases.org]

Moved to discussion because it does not seem appropriate for the page. Interpretation of the Bible is not a purpose that a encyclopedia should serve.~

Weasel-words tag
I'm on a mission to bring down the weasel-words tag! All we have to do is change a few sentances so that it would make sense to someone of any faith. For example, "Paul argued against their erroneous beliefs" would only make sense from a Christian viewpoint. "Paul considered their beliefs un-Christian and argued strongly against them" is more NPOV, and still conveys the same meaning. As a test, maybe some non-Christian readers out there could read this article and give us their feedback. Anyone? --Glistenray 02:49, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I've noticed the tag is no longer present: did you manage it?! _> MonstaPro:Talk:Contrib. 14:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Exegesis removed from article
Chapter One

1.	 “From Paul … and from Sostainos our brother,”


 * [Sostainos] - “Probably the head of the Jewish synagogue who, according to Acts 18:7, was beaten before Gallio’s tribunal.” TIB X p. 12

2.	“to the assembly of God in Corinth, to those that were separated in the Anointed one [Christ, the messiah] Jesus and were called to be saints together with all those called”


 * “Jesus distinguished between the ‘called’ and the ‘chosen’, between those to whom the invitation had been extended and those who responded (Matt. 22:13). For Paul the ‘called’ are the ‘chosen’.” TIB X p. 16 [emphasis added]

“in all places in the name of our lord Jesus the Anointed one.”


 * “The phrase means to confess his lordship rather than to pray to him.” TIB X p. 17

“Our lord is their lord.”

3.	“Grace and peace to you from the God our father, and the lord Jesus the Anointed one.”


 * “Peace is the Semitic term for God’s salvation.” TIB X p. 18

7.	“… you lack no spiritual gift in your expectation of the revelation [αποκαλυψις, apocalypse] of our lord Jesus the Anointed one.”


 * “It is difficult to say whether the apostle means the final judgment, or our Lord’s coming to destroy Jerusalem, and make an end of the Jewish polity … which shortly afterward took place …” A.C. p.16
 * [For Paul it was the same thing.]

9.	“Faithful is the God who called you to the fellowship of his son, Jesus the Anointed one, our lord.”


 * “Faith means trust in the one who is faithful (Rom. 3:3). Salvation by faith is really salvation by the faithfulness of God.”  TIB X

10.	“Brethren, I implore of you, in the name of our lord Jesus the Anointed one that you be, all of you, of one opinion in your utterances … stand united in the same thinking and in the same doctrine.”


 * “… [i.e.] agree in the words which they used to express their religious faith … an exact conformity in sentiment is impossible to minds so variously constructed as those of the human race … therefore men should bear with each other; and not be so ready to imagine that none have the truth of God but they and their party.” A.C. VI p. 183

12.	“I am referring to the fact that each of you say, ‘I am associated with Saul’, or, ‘I am with Apolos’, ‘I am of Peter', and ‘I am of the Anointed’.”


 * “Some have claimed that the Christ party was composed of the conservative Jewish-Christian wing of the church, but the Judaizing problem is not faced until II Corinthians.” TIB

18.	“… the word [λογος logos] of the cross is foolishness in the eyes of those perishing, but to us, the saved, it is the power of God.”

…

20.	“Where is the sophist [σοφων sophon]? Where is the expert in the law [γραμμουτευς τον σαιο grammouteus ton saio]. Where is the polemicist [Συξητηγης Suzeteges] of this world [αιων aion]? Has not God made the wisdom of the world [κοσμος kosmos] foolish?”


 * “The great stress upon wisdom … [is] a natural consequence of any over-evaluation of men” TIB X p. 25


 * “… this wisdom of theirs induced them to seek out of the sacred oracles any sense, but the true one; and they made the word of God of none effect, by their traditions. After them, and precisely on their model, the School Men arose and they rendered the doctrine of the Gospel of no effect by their hypercritical questions and endless distinctions without differences.” A.C VI p. 185

22.	“Behold, the Jews request signs and the Greeks seek wisdom …”


 * “… the sign which seems particularly referred to here, is the assumption of secular power, which they expected in the Messiah: and because this sign did not appear in Christ, therefore the rejected him.” A.C. VI p. 186

23.	“But we preach The Anointed one crucified, a stumbling stone to Jews, and foolishness in the eyes of the Greeks.”

Chapter Two

6.	“We speak wisdom among the mature [τελειοις teleiois], but not the wisdom of this world [αιωνος ]”,


 * “Dr. Lightfoot – ‘… [this world;] that system which the Jews made up out of the writings of their scribes and doctors … to distinguish it from העולם הבא… the world to come, i.e. in the days of the Messiah … This [wisdom], says the apostle, is not the wisdom of this world, for that [this world] has not the manifested Messiah in it …’” A.C. VI p. 190

“nor the wisdom of the rulers of this world, coming to their end. 7.	“We tell the hidden wisdom of God, the wisdom that was concealed, and that was ordained by God to our glory before the worlds – 8.	“and not one of the rulers of this world knows, for had they known it, they would not have crucified the honored lord. 9.	“As it is written,

‘Which eye does not see and ear does not hear, nor does it occur to anyone [ולא עלה על לב איש]’ (~Isai.lxiv.4)

“all that God prepared for his beloved.”


 * [In re: 2:6-9] “Those who believe that this section is dominated by ideas from the mysteries think that the word τελειοι [teleioi] should be rendered ‘initiates’ … Three times Paul indicates specific aspects of his mysteries (15:51; Rom. 11:25; Col. 1:26-27) viz. the coming of the Parousia in that generation so that some will not die, the place of the hardening of the Jews in God’s plan of salvation, and the indwelling Christ. Since verse nine also describes what the mystery is which God reveals through his Spirit, we are safe in concluding that it involves eschatological aspects of redemption …” TIB X pp. 36-37


 * “Who are the αρχοντες του αιωνος τουτο [arkhontes tou aionos touto], the princes of this world (KJ), rulers of this age (RSV) who did not understand this mystery? Often it has been assumed that these were Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin, Pilate and Herod, the religious and political authorities collaborating in the crucifixion of Jesus (Act 13:27).  But how could they have known the secrets of God’s plan of salvation?  Clearly we must adopt the interpretation, which goes back to Origen, that these are angelic rulers who, according to ancient thought, stood behind human agents and were the real causes of historic events.  They were the ‘angels’ and ‘principalities’ (Rom 8:38) who had been defeated on the cross.  Possibly Paul may have shared ideas similar to those in the Ascension of Isaiah 10-1, where the heavenly Christ is not recognized by the powers as he descends through the heavens.  Not understanding God’s mystery, these principalities and powers conspired to bring Jesus to his death.  In fact, however, this brought his triumph over them (Col. 2:15).  These sprits are to be identified with the elemental sprits of the universe (Gal. 4:3, 9; Col. 2:8) which are no longer to be served, since the Crucifixion brought the defeat of the ‘ruler of this world’ (John 12:31) …


 * “…Paul [has] a secret wisdom for those mature Christians who fully possess the Spirit; it concerns fuller details of God’s plans of salvation, which the angelic powers did not know. Since Paul was thinking of this age and the age to come, [and] ‘doomed to pass away’ renders a present tense, the final defeat of those powers awaits the Parousia (15:25) …” TIB X pp. 37-38

10.	“But by his spirit God revealed to us even the depths of God, because the spirit discovers everything.”


 * “… the self-consciousness of God … this psychological interpretation of the Trinity, paving the way for St. Augustine’s … in the bestowal of the Spirit men have received nothing less than god’s self-consciousness. Therefore they are able to understand his secret wisdom.” TIB X pp. 39-40

Chapter Three

10.	“According to the grace of God that was given me I laid a foundation like a wise builder, and another built upon it. But take care everyone how he builds, 11.	“for none can lay a foundation over the foundation that has been laid, which is Jesus the the Anointed one.”


 * “Could it be that the leader of the Cephas faction was claiming that Peter was the rock on which the church was built? (Matt. 16:18) That is quite possible … Just as he had opposed Cephas to his face (Gal. 2:11), he did not hesitate to oppose those who apparently claimed his authority at Corinth.” TIB p 47

12.	“And every man, if he build on this foundation with gold or silver or precious stones or wood or block or straw – 13.	“his work will be made clear, because the day will bring it to light, because it will be revealed in fire; and the fire will examine the work of each and every man.”


 * “That the apostle refers to the approaching destruction of Jerusalem, I think very probable… the whole temple service should be destroyed, and the people who fondly presumed on their permanence and stability should be dispossessed of their land, and scattered over the face of the whole earth. The difference between the Christian and Jewish systems should then be seen: the latter should be destroyed in that fiery day, and the former prevail more than ever.” A.C. VI p.195

16.	“Do you not know that you are the temple of God, and that the spirit of God dwells among you? 17.	“If man destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him, because the temple of God is holy, and you are his temple.” … 21.	“Therefore, do not praise any man. Behold, all things are yours: 22.	“Saul, Apolos, Kaipha [Peter], the world, life, death, things that are in the present, things that are in the future – everything is yours; 23.	“and you are of the Anointed one, and the Anointed one is of God.”

Chapter Four

5.	“Therefore do not judge anything before the time that the lord comes, which will bring to light transgressions in darkness, and reveal thoughts of the heart. Then will be given the praise to all men from God.”


 * “Here, in contrast to Romans 8:30, [Paul] does not hold that the experience of justification at conversion assures acquittal at the last judgment. The course of action between will determine.” TIB X p. 54

8.	“You are already satiated! You are already rich! You reign without us! I wish that you reigned indeed so that we could reign with you too. 9.	“As for us, the apostles, I guess that God set us last, sentenced to death; for we were a spectacle to the world, both to angels and men. 10.	“We are fools because of the Anointed one, but you are wise in the Anointed one! We are weak, but you are strong! You are honored, but we are despised. 11.	“To this very hour we are hungry and thirsty, naked and beaten; we wander from place to place, 12.	“and toil in manual labor.”


 * “The Corinthians were behaving as if they thought the kingdom of God had already fully come. They were acting as if they were already reigning with Christ (Luke 22:29-30, Rev. 20:4).  They were mistaking the guarantee which the Spirit bestows for the plentitude of God’s salvation.  Believers had not yet received their bodies of glory.  They were living in that narrow isthmus of time between the resurrection and the Parousia of Christ.  This was a period when suffering was the lot of true Christians (I Thes. 3:4). … It is with genuine poignancy that Paul expresses the wish that this was actually so and that the messianic rule had begun.   Though believers were already ‘in Christ’, salvation belonged to the future when he would come in glory.”  TIB X pp. 55-56

“They revile us – we bless; persecute us – we bear that. 13.	“They defame us, despite our encouraging words. We have been as refuse of the world, repulsive to all unto this day.”


 * “The Christian spirit of non-retaliation described in a beautiful series of antitheses. It is the idea of Matt. 5:44 ff., Rom. 12:14 f., and I Pet 3:9.  Not that Paul himself lives up to it perfectly.  He confronted some revilers whom he is not exactly blessing even in this letter.”  TIB X p. 56

19.	“But I will come to you shortly, Lord willing, and I will see not the words of the haughty but their power. 20.	“For the kingdom of God is not in speech, but in the power [δυναμει dunamei] of the work.”


 * “The Kingdom of God is not used echatologically as in verse eight, but of the present rule, as in Col. 1:13, 4:11, and Rom. 14-17.” TIB X

Chapter Five

1.	“All ears hear that there is fornication [πορνεια (porneia)] among you, fornication like which there is not even among the gentiles: a man took to himself his father’s wife.”


 * “Πορνεια means extra marital intercourse of any kind.  The grounds for Paul’s objection lie in the fact that the relationship violated pagan custom as well as Jewish law.  Marriage to a man’s step mother was forbidden in Lev. 18:18 and carried the death penalty (Lev. 2:11) … This relationship was also forbidden by Roman law.  Though Corinthian life did not stand directly under this jurisdiction … Presumably this man was a former pagan to whom Jewish law would not apply, and Paul does not claim that Christians were obligated to keep the law… As to whether a proselyte could marry his step-mother … there would have been no objection on the part of the majority of rabbinical opinion.  Rabbi Akiva (A.D. 135) held the contrary opinion, though the final Talmudic decision did not sustain him.” TIB X p. 60

5.	“Deliver this man to Satan, for the destruction of his body so that his spirit can be saved in the day of YHVH.”


 * “… a species of punishment administered in extraordinary cases in which the body and the mind of the incorrigible transgressor were delivered by the authority of God, into the power of Satan to be tortured with diseases and terrors as a warning to all: but … the immortal spirit was under the influence of the divine mercy and the affliction, in all probability, was in general only for a season, though some times it was evidently unto death. ... such power as this remains in the Church of God … pretensions to it are as wicked as they are vain. It was the same power by which Ananais and Saphira were stuck dead; Polymas, the sorcerer struck blind.  Apostles also were entrusted with it.” A.C. VI p. 304

13.	“ God will judge those that are without; burn the evil that is within you.”

Chapter Six

2.	“Do you not know that the saints will judge the world [κρονος kronos]? … 3.	“Do you not know that we will judge angels? All the more so things related to daily life! … 6.	“Instead, brother sues brother, and this before unbelievers! … 8.	“And ever do evil to and defraud each other; to your brethren you do this!”


 * “… in vivid expectation of the consummation of the divine rule, the apostle is pleading that its members begin now to exercise the responsibilities that will soon be theirs.” TIB X p. 69


 * “Paul was quite indifferent to the question whether any society could ever be based on such an idealistic principle.” TIB X p. 71

9.	“Or what? Do you not know that evil doers will not inherit the kingdom of God?”


 * “The Kingdom of God is here the eschatological age following the resurrection. (15:50)” TIB X p. 72

12.	“Everything is permitted me, but not everything is useful. Everything is permitted me, but I will not be enslaved to anything. 13.	“… the body is not for fornication, but for the lord, and the lord is for the body. 14.	“and God will resurrect our lord, and in his power raise also us.”


 * “Behind the slogan ‘all things are lawful’ is the assumption that physical acts do not affect the inner man. Paul asserts on the contrary two limitations on Christian freedom (a) … is the act ‘helpful’ to others?  (b) … will the act make us slaves to passion and thus destroy freedom itself?  … Real freedom lies in the choice of our master.  ... the Gnostic libertines had used the agreement on the fact that food did not raise a moral issue to support their contention that sexual conduct also had not moral significance.  Paul grants that both food and the stomach belong to the transient physical sphere in which there can be no real defilement to man … but he denies that there is parallelism and rejects the conclusion that the unregulated satisfaction of sexual desires is simply natural … the body is not something transient, but will be raised from the dead.  For the moment Paul disregards the complete difference between the resurrection body and the earthly body”.  TIB X

Chapter Seven

“The whole chapter is dominated … by the expectation of the imminent Parousia. Responsibility toward children and the generations to come does not enter into the apostle’s calculations, for he thought of himself living not in the first century but in the last.” TIB X p. 76

1.	“Regarding that which you wrote me: ‘It is good that a man refrains from a woman.’ 2.	“Because of fornication, every man should marry a woman, and for every woman there should be a husband. … 5.	“Do not restrain yourselves from one another without agreement for a specific time in order to turn to prayer. After that, resume and unite, lest Satan tempt you because of your inability to bridle the impulse.”


 * “… this was a matter in which common sense could well judge; and under the direction of experience, heathens as well as those favored with divine revelation could see what was proper.” A.C. VI p. 212

7.	“Would that all men were like me, but to each his gift from God, one in this wise and another in that.”


 * “Continence is a state that man cannot acquire by human art or industry, a man has it from God, or not at all; and if he have it from God, he has it from him as the author of all nature, for where it does not exist naturally, it never can exist but either by miraculous interference, which should never be expected; or by chirurgical operation, which is a shocking abomination in the sight of God.”  A.C. VI p. 212

10.	“And I command the women (or rather the lord does): a wife is not to separate from her husband – 11.	“but if separated, remain free or reconcile to her husband – and man is not to leave his wife.”


 * “Paul knows nothing of any exception such as is recognized in Matt. 5:32 and 19:9: ‘except on the grounds of unchastity’. This was obviously an addition modifying the unqualified word of Jesus [Mark 10:5-9]. TIB X p. 78

17.	“Every man will live his life according to that which the Lord apportioned him, according to the station to which the Lord called him. Thus I command in every congregation.”


 * “During the Reformation period this section [verses 17-24] was extremely important for the development of the idea of Christian ‘calling’. Paul’s words here have lent powerful support to the conservatives of all times who seek to resist social change … But these … frequently overlook the revolutionary expectations of the apostle.  People were to stay as they were because the present age had but a few years to last, was already abolished in Christ (Gal. 3:20), and when he comes the old state of affairs will pass away.  Unless Paul’s vivid eschatological expectations … are born in mind, the reader will grossly misinterpret is intention” TIB X p.81


 * “There is a predestination which does not relate to final salvation, but to a man’s abilities and the station in which he finds himself. The ‘given’ is the existential situation which is not of our choosing, but is assigned to us and against which it is fruitless to rebel … Christians are not to stir up opposition to the political and economic order, but are to wait patiently for the great overturning which is so near at hand.”  TIB X p. 81

18.	“If a man was called when he was circumcised, do no draw out his foreskin. 19.	“It is neither the covenant that matters, nor the foreskin, but observance of God’s commandments.”


 * “… the sum and substance of religion.” A.C. p. 215

20.	“Remain each in the position in which he was called. 21.	“If you were called when you were a slave, do not worry. But if it is within your ability to go free, by all means take advantage of that.

…
 * “Here Paul approaches closely to the attitude cultivated in Stoicism, but there is a marked difference: stoicism affirmed that in spite of outer circumstances, the inner freedom of man could and should be maintained.” TIB X p 83

25.	“As for the virgins, I have no instructions from the lord, but I will state my opinion as one who has managed, by the mercies of the Lord, to be faithful.”


 * “This passage contains the frankest expression of an interim ethic anywhere in the New Testament. The apostle’s ‘opinion’ is given in full view of the impending distress’ (vs. 26) and because the appointed time has grown very short (vs. 29) and the form of this world is passing away (v. 31).  Since the ground for his advice has not materialized in 19 centuries, it is difficult to see how anyone can ascribe normative significance to the word … we may believe that Paul is ‘trustworthy’ and yet in this particular regard unfortunately mistaken.”  TIB p. 84


 * [On the contrary, the events which did in fact transpire made these instruction quite sensible as well as consistent with Jesus’ on the subject. The distress and all its consequences did occur well within the lifetime of the audience.  What did not occur was the second coming. A Georgian (talk) 03:29, 8 August 2008 (UTC)]

26.	“I am of the opinion that because of the present distress it is better for a man to remain thus.” … 27.	“If you are connected to a wife, do not seek to undo the connection. If you are not connected to a wife, do not seek a wife. 28.	“But if you take yourself a wife, you do not sin. And the virgin, if she marries, she does not sin; it is only that they will have trouble in their flesh, and I pity them.”


 * “The ‘distress’ … refer[s] … to the messianic wars which were to precede the end. These were a standing feature of Jewish apocalyptic writings (Assumption of Moses 10:3-6; II Baruch 27:1 ff.; II Esdras 5:-12; etc.) and appear in all Christian apocalypses as well (Mark 13:5 ff; Rev. 6; 8-9, etc).  The word αναγκη [anagke]is used in this sense in Luke 21:23, where the peril to pregnant women is specially noted.  ‘Trouble in the flesh’ (KJV) expresses this more literally than ‘worldly troubles’ (RSV)” TIB X p. 84

29.	“And I tell you brethren, the time presses. Therefore be, those that have wives, as though they have none, ... 31. “and be, those who benefit from this world [κοσμος kosmos], as though they do not; for the form of this world is perishing away.”


 * “… often the term κοσμος ‘world’ is taken to signify the Jewish state and polity, the destruction of this was then at hand.” A.C. VI p. 217

35.	“This I tell you for your own good, not to burden you, but that you conduct yourselves enlightened, and devote yourselves to the lord without hindrance.”


 * “It is hardly the experience of anyone familiar with young people that marriage interferes with service to the Lord. Like so many other good men, Paul is here rationalizing his prejudices.”  TIB X p. 86


 * [No, TIB misses the fact that Paul was not foretelling what would happen for the next couple of millennia, but what did happen less than 20 years after he wrote the letter. A Georgian (talk) 03:29, 8 August 2008 (UTC)]

39.	“The wife is tied to he husband the whole time he lives. And if the husband dies, she is allowed to marry whomever she wants, as long as he is in the lord. 40.	“But she would be better off to remain free. This is my opinion and my thought while the spirit of God was also in me.”

Chapter Eight

1.	“Regarding sacrifices to idols, we know that ‘we all have an opinion’. Opinion derives from pride, but it is love that edifies.


 * “The problem had arisen as a result of the attitude taken by certain Gnostics and libertarian members of the community. This was one of the issues on which they had affirmed, ‘all things are lawful for me’ (6; 12).  Here Paul agrees with the fundamental principles as set forth in 6:13, adhering to the gospel tenet that ‘there is nothing outside a man which by going into him can defile him’ (Mark 7:15).  But the use of liberty involves the obligations of love.” TIB X p. 89

… 4.	 “Therefore, regarding eating idol sacrifice, we know that there is no meaning to ‘idol’ in the world, and that there are no gods but one. 5.	“And even if there are those known as ‘idols’, whether in heaven ore earth – as if there were various idols and lords – 6.	“for us there is one God, the father, from whom is everything, including us, and one lord, Jesus the Anointed one, according to whom everything is arranged, and for whom we exist.”
 * “Paul is conscious of the limitation of knowledge. It may inflate the individual without necessarily serving the community.”  TIB X p. 91


 * [Is this a distinction between the Creator, and the ruler anointed by the Creator?]


 * “When Paul ascribed lordship to Christ, in contrast to later church dogma, he did not mean that Christ was God. Christ was definitely subordinated to God (2:23, 15:28).  Paul did not believe in two Gods.  He believed in God the Father and the Jesus Christ the Lord.  How these were related was a problem which waited upon the theological speculation of a much later time.”  TIB X p. 94

… 7.	“But not everyone knows this. There are people still used to idols, and eat the food as idol sacrificial, and since their conscience is weak, so he is defiled.”
 * [Had the Parousia occurred as Paul said it would, it his lifetime, Jesus would have been enthroned by the heavenly host, the Kingdom of God would have come to earth, and the distinction between the Davidic heir to the Messianic promise of God in scripture and God himself would have been unavoidable. A Georgian (talk) 03:29, 8 August 2008 (UTC)]


 * “The most conscientious people may be moved by quite misguided principles. A conviction of moral obligation is not necessarily accompanied by infallibility of insight into the content of duty.”  TIB C p. 95

Chapter Nine

16.	“… when I herald the good news I have nothing in which to be praised, because my obligation is imposed upon me, and woe is me if I do not preach. 17.	“If of my on accord I did this, a reward would be due me. But if not of my own accord, then the responsibility is put into my hands. 18.	“So what is my reward? In this, that I herald the good tidings, and exhort it freely, without exploiting my rights as preacher!”


 * “It would be easy for his readers to conclude that Paul was laboring this point so long because he wanted them to show belated generosity toward him. The apostle repudiates any such conclusion so emphatically that his sentences lose all grammatical construction.”  TIB X p. 102

19.	“But since I am slave to no man, I enslaved myself to all, in order to gather the many. 20.	“For the sake of Jews I am as a Jew in order to gain Jews, to those under the Law I am as one under the Law, (although I am not under the Law), in order to reach those under the Law 21.	“For the sake of those without the Law, I am as one without the Law, (although I do not stand without the Law of God, being under the law of the Anointed one) in order to reach those who do not have the Law. 22.	“For the sake of the weak, I am weak, in order to reach the weak. I am everything for the sake of everyone, in order to save at least some of them.”


 * “This paragraph is a rhythmic period quite consciously constructed on the chiastic principle.”  TIB X p. 104

23.	“But I do everything for the sake of the tidings, in order that there will be a place for me.”

Chapter 10

1.	“Brethren, I do not want it to be lost upon you that all your fathers were under the cloud, and all of them passed within the sea, 2.	“and all of them were baptized by Moses in cloud and sea. 3.	“All of them ate the same spiritual food, 4.	“and all of them drank the same spiritual drink, for they drank from the spiritual rock that went with them, and this rock was the Anointed one.”


 * “At two different places in the Old Testament Moses is said to have struck the rock and water flowed out so that the thirsty people might drink. One was at Horeb (Exodus 17:6) and the other in the wilderness of Zin (Num. 20: 7-11).  Jews at this time had no intimation of the documentary analysis of the Pentateuch … their deduction was that the Rock had followed the Israelites.” TIB X p. 105

7.	“Do not be worshippers of idols as were some of them, as is written:

‘and the people returned to drinking and eating, and they rose to play’

8.	“Neither fornicate, as some of them fornicated, and on one day 23,000 of them fell.”


 * “That Paul’s figure is a thousand short of the number in the Old Testament will surprise no one who has tired to quote scripture from memory, but it is fatal to any theory of verbal infallibility.” TIB X p. 112

11.	“What happened to them should be taken as an example, and it was written down to be a warning to us, we upon whom the end of the times has come [τα τελη τον αιον ta tele ton aion.


 * “Paul thinks in terms of the doctrine of two ages (7:29, Heb. 9:26, II Esdras 6:7). The recounting of these experiences was to instruct those who stood in the isthmus of time between two ages.”  TIB X p. 111

Chapter Eleven

3.	“I want you to know that the head of all men is the Anointed one, and the head of woman is the man, and the head of the Anointed one is God.


 * “Paul suggests that the quest of the women for emancipation and equality with men was in violation of the divine order.” TIB X p. 127

4.	“Any man who prays or prophesizes and his head is covered dishonors his head.”


 * “To anyone who has attended an orthodox Jewish service this passage will be quite unintelligible. But in the first century a Jewish man did not cover his head for prayer.  That custom, originally a sign of sorrow, arose in the fourth century (Strack and Billerbeck, Kommentar zum N.T., III, 423-26).  TIB X. p. 126

5.	“And any woman who prays or prophesizes bareheaded dishonors her head, such that she is as one who shaves the hair of her head. 6.	“If the head of the woman is not covered, then it may as well be sheared, but if it embarrasses her to shear or shave her hair, she should cover it.”


 * “This passage illustrates the perennial problem of the relationship of social customs to Christian morality ... It was not easy for the apostle to draw consistent conclusions from his conviction that in Christ ‘there is neither male nor female’ (Gal. 3:29). At least while the present age remained.  When respectable women were veiled outside their homes and only courtesans were unveiled, the exercise of ‘freedom’ could lead to gross misinterpretation.”  TIB X p. 124

7.	“The man in not required to cover his head, because he is the image and glory of God; but the woman, she is the glory of the man. 8.	“For man is not of the woman, rather the woman is from the man. 9.	“Furthermore, the man was not created for the sake of the woman; rather the woman was created for the man.


 * “From the story of the creation of woman in Gen. 2:22 [as opposed to the one in chapter Gen. 5] [Paul] infers a priority of man (cf. I Tim. 2:13). … So far everything is clear regarding Paul’s commentary on the O.T.: but the conclusion he would draw is decidedly obscure and appears to involve a non sequitur.”  TIB X p. 128

10.	“Because of this, it is necessary that there be authority over the woman’s head, because of the angels.”


 * “What is meant by the εξουσια [exousia] which a woman should have on her head, and what connection has this with angles? (a) Some take it as a ‘sign of dependence.’ Then the angels would be mentioned because they were the protectors of the orders of creation.  … (b) Others take power in the sense of ‘protection.’  The angels are looked upon as present at the service of worship and women need defense against their lust.  But did Paul use the word angels for evil beings?”  TIB X p. 128


 * “The reader has now before him everything that is likely to cast light on this difficult subject; and he must either adopt what he judges to be best, or else ‘think for himself’” A.C. VI p. 202

11.	“And truly, in the lord [κuρια kuria], the woman is always dependent on man, and man always depends on the woman, 12.	“for just as the woman is from the man, it is also true that the man is born from the woman, and everything is from God.”


 * “Possibly Paul feared that he had gone too far in stressing the subordination of women.” TIB X p. 28

13.	“Judge for yourselves; is it proper for a woman to pray to God bareheaded?” 14.	“Does not nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair it is to his shame? 15.	“But the woman, if she has long hair, it is to her glory, for the hair was given her as a covering. 16.	“… we do not have such a custom, neither do the assemblies of God.”


 * “Paul did not really base his conclusions on a natural order; he was rationalizing the customs in which he believed, and in the end he admits it. He falls back finally on his own authority … Congregational authority is not admitted in a matter of this kind. … [he] fastened divine authority upon particular mores in a way that has confused customs and morals.”  TIB X pp. 129 -130

20.	“And this: when you gather together in one place, it is not in order to eat the Lord’s Supper; 21.	“for each begins to eat his meal, and as a result this one is hungry and that one is drunk [μεθυει methuei].” … 23.	“For I received from the lord that which I also delivered to you, that the lord Jesus, in the night he was betrayed, took the bread, 24.	“blessed it” [[but] “given thanks (ευχαριστεω) [eucharis] instead of ‘bless’ (ευλογεω) [eulogize] which stands in Mark” TIB X p. 137], “broke it, and said,

‘This is my body, broken for you, this do to my memory.’

25.	“So he also took the cup after the meal, and said,

26.	‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood, this do in my memory every time you drink.’”


 * “No Gospel contains this ["this do to my memory"]; the long text of Luke ((22:19b – 20) is almost certainly a later insertion based on I Corinthians. When we realize the polemical purpose which Paul has in this section … we can hardly contend that the words come from Jesus.”  TIB X p. 136


 * “In this passage we have the clearest picture of a Eucharistic celebration which we possess from the first century. … The meal was more than a symbolic tasting of food. It was one in which gluttony and drunkenness were possible.  It may be that these dangers increased after the time of Paul and ultimately led to the detachment of the liturgical act from the common meal.  This came to be known as the agape or love feast (Jude 12). …


 * “Paul criticizes a practice at the Lord’s table which appears to go back to a very different theory concerning its nature. Many of the members were turning the meal into a joyous festivity.  Paul insists that it should be a solemn commemoration. … Hans Lietzmann in Messe und Herrenmahl (Bonn: A. Marcus & E. Weber, 1926) … holds that there were two quite different types of celebration in the primitive church.  One was the Jerusalem type, the other the Pauline type.  The Jerusalem type had no particular relation to the Last Supper.  It afforded rather a continuation of all the tablefellowhip which the disciples had enjoyed with their Master on earth, and it looked forward to their reunion at the messianic banquet so soon to come. It was the ‘breaking of bread … with glad and generous hearts’ of which we read in Acts 2:46.  For Paul (and we know not how many others) the meal was a commemoration of the Last Supper.  The Cephas faction at Corinth was apparently leading the way toward a Jerusalem type of celebration and Paul was much concerned for what he felt to be the more correct view.  Therefore he reminds them of the events which they were commemorating.  To enforce his polemic against the other point of view, he inserts the words this do in remembrance of me; for this was the understanding of the act which he had received from the Lord. …


 * “From ch. 10 we may also conclude that this was a sacrificial meal. That did not mean, however, that Christ was the victim who was in some way consumed. For the early church the sacrifice consisted in the offering of the food to God.  We should avoid confusion between the death of Christ as a sacrifice and the Lord’s Supper as a sacrificial meal. … It is Cyprian who first connects the Sacrifice in the death of Christ with the sacrifice of the Mass.  In the church before him, and certainly according to the mind of Paul, the offering was of bread and wine in thanksgiving to God.”  TIB X pp. 130 – 132

Chapter Twelve

27.	“You are the body and organs of the Anointed one, each man according to his appointment. 28.	“And God appointed you from the assembly – first the emissaries [αποστολος apostles];”


 * “Twelve disciples had been chosen by Jesus as an inner group and as rulers over the twelve tribes in the new age (Mark 3:13 – 19). … In addition to the twelve, James, Barnabas, Andronicus, and Junias, and others are designated by this title. From the Didache  (11:3ff) we know that into the second century there were wandering preachers who were called ‘apostles’.”  TIB X p. 163

“second, prophets;”


 * “For Judaism the Spirit was no longer given since the closing of the canon of the prophets. But within the Church there was a new outburst of prophecies.”  TIB X p. 163

“third, teachers; after them miracle workers; after them gifts of healing, helpers [i.e. ‘social workers’], administrators, and polyglots [Γενη γλασσων].”


 * “This gradation in rank is in formal contradiction to what has been said earlier in the chapter about the common source and equal quality of all gifts.” TIB X p. 163

Chapter 13

1.	“If I speak in tongues of men and angels, and have not within me love [αγαπη, agape], then I am like noisy brass or crashing cymbals.”


 * “Into the less common word αγαπη (as opposed to ερως (eros), which commonly expressed the love of the adorable object, or σιλια [silia], which means essentially ‘friendship’), the early Christians poured all the riches of the central revelation that had come to them. God’s unmerited grace had been bestowed on them … man could not return this to God; he could only respond to God’s love by loving his fellow man in the same way.”  TIB X p. 166

5.	“… she does not seek her own good …”


 * “… that man is no Christian who is solicitous for his own happiness alone; and cares not how the world goes, so that himself be comfortable.” A.C. VI p. 256

Chapter 14

1.	“Pursue love and crave spiritual gifts, especially prophecy. 2.	“The speaker in tongues [γλοσσαι – glossai; the toungue being Hebrew according to Adam Clarke VI p. 262] doesn’t speak to people, but to God; no man understands him, for in spirit he utters secrets.” … 4.	“The speaker in tongues edifies himself; the prophet edifies the assembly.” … 34.	“The women are to be quiet in assemblies; they have not permission to speak, but are to humble themselves to authority, as also the Law says. 35.	“And if they wish to learn something, they should ask their husbands at home, for it is unseemly that a woman speaks in assembly.”


 * “.. compare with xi.5” A.C. VI


 * “How is the contradiction between these two passages to be resolved? The Bezar codex (D) and related Western MSS had vss. 34 – 35 at the close of the chapter, which suggest that they may have bee a marginal gloss, and were inserted into the text at different places.  This is the conclusion of many commentators.  There is no question but that Paul believed in the definite subordination of women (Col. 3:18) and was convinced that the emancipation of women from this subjugation would be in violation of the divine order.”  TIB X pp. 212 – 213

Chapter 15

3.	“I delivered to you, first and foremost, that which I also received, that the Anointed one died for our sins [I think this is the first time Paul suggest this reason for Jesus’ death], according to the scriptures, 4.	“was buried and rose to life on the third day, according to the scriptures, 5.	“was seen by Cephus [Peter], and after that by the twelve [δωδεχα dodekha], 6.	“after that he was seen by more than 500 brethren at one time, of whom most still live and few have died. 7.	“Later he was seen by Jacob (James), and after that by all the emissaries [apostles].”


 * “Though chapter 13 is the best known portion of this letter, chapter 15 has the greatest historical significance. It contains the earliest and most important testimony to the resurrection of Jesus and to its place in the Christian message.”  TIB X

21.	“Just as death came at the hands of a man, so also is raising the dead at the hand of man. 22.	“And just as in Adam all die, so also in the Anointed all live. 23.	“But each according to his order, the first is the Anointed one, after him, when he comes, those connected with the Anointed one, 24.	“after that the end, whereupon the kingdom will be delivered to God the Father, after all the governments, authorities, and rulers are destroyed. 25.	“Because it is for him to rule until all his enemies are put under his feet. 26.	“The last enemy to be overthrown is death. … 28.	“And just as everything is put under Him, so also is the son himself subordinate to Him under whom is everything …”


 * “There is no evidence that [Paul] speculated on the fate of those who had never heard the gospel; except so far as it affected the fate of Israel.” TIB X p. 239

32.	“… if there is no raising of the dead, let us eat and drink, ‘for tomorrow we die’.”


 * “The Epicurean conclusion, that since death ends all, life is to be enjoyed to the full, is one possible conclusion, but it is not the only one possible. Others say that since nothing lies beyond the grave, we must work with redoubled effect.” TIB X p. 242

35.	“’But how are the dead raised?’ one asks, ‘In what body will they come?’”


 * “The problem of an intermediate state is not faced in the letter before us because the apostle expected to survive until the Parousia.” TIB X p. 244

39.	“Not all flesh is the same; man has his flesh, animals a different flesh, birds a different flesh, and fish a different. 40.	“There are heavenly bodies and earthly bodies, but there is a difference between the glory of the heavenly body and the glory of earthly bodies. 41.	“The sun has its glory, but the glory of the moon is different; and the glory of the stars is different, and stars differ from one another in glory.”


 * “It is impossible to ascertain the distance of any of the fixed stars; even the nearest of them being too remote to afford any parallax without which their distances cannot be measured.” A.C. VI p. 276

42.	“Thus it is with raising the dead; that which was sown in corruption is raised incorrupt. … 44.	“A soul body is sown [ψυχικος, psyche] but a spiritual body is raised [πνευμα pneuma] ...”


 * “It is one thing to describe the contrast between earthly bodies and those of a different character; it is another thing to demonstrate that there is an imperishable body that belongs with the divine pneuma.  Everything really hinges on the truth of that possibility, for Paul agrees that perishable flesh and blood can have no part in the coming kingdom of God which lies beyond the resurrection (vs. 50).” TIB X p. 247

46.	“The spiritual was not first; the soulful was, and after that the spiritual.”


 * “Philo ... [a] contemporary of Paul noted that Genesis had two accounts of the creation of man. Knowing nothing of an analysis into different documents, he drew the conclusion that in Gen., 1:26 we have the account of the creation of ideal man, the Platonic archetype.  He was made in the image of God.  When Gen 2:7 tells of the forming of man out of dust of the earth, it describes the creation of empirical man, the one who sins.  Later rabbis indulged in similar speculations.  It has been contended with some probability that this speculation roots in an Iranian conception of a primitive heavenly man through whom the redemption of the world is to come.  But Philo did not relate his speculation about the heavenly man to the messianic hope.   Paul argued against the Philonic type of interpretation because he did not begin with the two accounts in Genesis but with the eschatological fact of Christ….  He assumed a historical sequence of two different ages, each having its origin in one man. The point of view here contrasts with that of Christ as pre-existing (10:4) and the agent of creation (8:6).  If the world was created through Christ, he was actually before Adam in time …. But in this passage Paul is thinking not of cosmological relationships but of the eschatological situation.  That which is related to the psyche came first; pnuema comes through the one who gives this eschatological gift.”  TIB X pp. 247 – 248

47.	“The first man was dust from the earth, the second man is from is from heaven [ouranios]. … 49.	“And just as we wore the image of the earthly, we will wear the heavenly image also. 50.	“I will say this, brethren; flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor can the corruptible inherit incorruptibility.”


 * “Paul knows nothing of an appeal to sensual experiences such as in Luke 24:39, nor does he recognize an ascension after forty days (Acts 1:9) that divided the appearances of the risen Christ from the life of the heavenly Lord. The first-born from the dead had put on the imperishable at once.”  TIB X p. 249

51.	“Now I will tell you a secret; we will not all die, but we will all change”


 * “… the coming of the Lord was so immanent that not all his readers would experience even this short night of sleep before the resurrection of the dead.” TIB X 250

52.	“in an instant [ατομος atomos] like an eye blink, in the last trumpet,”

“… the eschatological trumpet of Isa. 27:13 which will call back the dispersed to the worship at Jerusalem.” TIB X pp. 250 – 251

“when the ram’s horn [shophar] is blown and the dead rise incorruptible, and we [the still living] will be transformed. 53.	“For those worthy, who are corruptible, will wear incorruptibility, and the mortal will wear immortality [αθανασια, athanasia],


 * “The term αθανασια was a key word in Hellenistic though. The gods were believed to be immortal (cf. I Tim. 6:16), and according to the Platonic school, so was the soul of man…  The O.T. contains no equivalent for the word immortality, for Jewish thought conceived of man as essentially mortal.  But in the Hellenistic-Jewish literature αθανασια is found (Wisd. Sol. 3:4; 15:3; IV Macc. 14:5, and often in Philo)…. But even when Paul uses the word here it is in a quite different sense: immortality is not something which belongs to man by nature; it is put on when God raises him from the dead.”  TIB X p. 251

54.	“thus fulfilling the written word,

‘Death is swallowed up by victory. [Isaiah 25: 8] 55.		Where is your sting, death? Where is your victory, death?’” [Hosea 13:14]


 * “In each [quotation] Paul departs form the original Hebrew text. This only serves to emphasize how completely different Paul’s thought was from the scripture whose fulfillment he announced.  In Isa. 25:8 Paul is closer to the rendering of Theod. than to that of the LXX, which did not contain the word victory.  Since the apostle never uses the word ‘Hades,’ it is not strange that he repeats death.  The KJV follows the koine when it reads grave, correcting Paul’s words to the original text of Hos. 13:14.  As may be seen from modern translations, that passage contained on the lips of the prophet a terrible pronouncement of doom.‘Shall I ransom them from the power of Sheol? Shall I redeem them from Death?’ “The answer was, of course, ‘No.’” TIB X pp. 251- 252

Chapter 16

22.	“Whoever loves not the lord will be cursed [αναθεμα, anathema]! Come lord! [مرنش طش marana tha] 23.	“My love to all of you in Jesus the Anointed one.”


 * “It was customary for Paul to add a greeting in his own handwriting (Col. 4:18; Philem. 19). This served to authenticate the document (II Thess. 3:17). … But to take up the calamus  himself and lay the scroll across his own knees frequently seemed to stir in Paul even more violent expressions than usual (Gal. 6:11).  Immediately he invokes a curse, not on personal opponents, but on any one who had no love for the Lord.  The KJV leaves the word anathema untranslated (cf. 12:3; Rom. 9:3; and Gal. 1:8).  But why should any version fail to translate such a word? ... Likewise the KJV left Maranatha untranslated.  Here there was more justification; this was an Aramaic phase which Paul himself included untranslated in his Greek letter.  … For the early church “Thy Kingdom come” is naturally turned into a petition for the coming the King. … Here lives and prays a church for which the imminent coming of the Lord is a vital hope.”  TIB X pp. 261 – 262

TNJBC = The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, edited by Raymond E. Brown, S.S., Union Theological Seminary, New York, NY, Joseph A Fitzmyer, S. J. (emeritus) Catholic University of America, Washington DC, and Roland E. Murphey, O. Carm. (emeritus) The Divinity School, Duke University, Durham, NC, with a foreword by His Eminence Carlo Maria Cardinal martini, S.J., Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1990

A.C. = The New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. The text carefully printed from the most correct copies of the present Authorized Version. Including the marginal readings and parallel texts. With a Commentary and Critical Notes. Designed as a help to a better understanding of the sacred writings. By Adam Clarke, LL.D. F.S.A. M.R.I.A. With a complete alphabetical index. Royal Octavo Stereotype Edition.[in six volumes] New York, Published by J. Emory and B. Waugh, for the Methodist Episcopal Church, at the conference office, 13 Crosby-Street. J. Collord, Printer. 1831.

TIB = The Interpreter’s Bible, The Holy Scriptures in the King James and Revised Standard versions with general articles and introduction, exegesis, [and] exposition for each book of the Bible in twelve volumes, George Arthur Buttrick, Commentary Editor, Walter Russell Bowie, Associate Editor of Exposition, Paul Scherer, Associate Editor of Exposition, John Knox Associate Editor of New Testament Introduction and Exegesis, Samuel Terrien, Associate Editor of Old Testament Introduction and Exegesis, Nolan B. Harmon Editor, Abingdon Press, copyright 1954 by Pierce and Washabaugh, set up printed, and bound by the Parthenon Press, at Nashville, Tennessee, Volume X

I've placed this here because it its really beyond the scope of what belongs in a WP article. I see it has been discussed on your talk page, and I know you're working in good-faith, so I think it's something that we can at least talk about and salvage. Carl.bunderson (talk) 23:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I know its massive, but I feel like Mozart (in the movie) when the King told him that the piece he'd just played had too many notes. I am so new to Wikipedia that I have no idea what the parameters are, and, will admit, that I've been more interested in putting this stuff up willy nilly than in learing the conventions of the medium. P.S. - I am not even sure if this is how to begin a correspondece about salvage. A Georgian (talk) 04:31, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, this is fine. Basically this (and your other edits) is, first off, too long. People are coming to WP to get an idea of the topic they're looking up. So discussing the content of the letter, and its themes, would be more appropriate than a line-by-line exegesis. I don't want to come off as having hubris, but if you look over on the pages of the any of the pieces of Wisdom Literature, there are sections I wrote on messianic themes in them. I like to think that that is what we are shooting for on these. And rather than having big quotes from the sources you've used, it would be better to write your own prose discussing the letter, and then provide sources for what your wrote in the form of references. If you don't have a welcome template on your talk page I'll post one and it should have some links explaining how we format references; basically, it's best if you footnote things.
 * Writing for WP should be like an essay you write for a college class. It needs to be your writing, but footnoted/referenced well. Some big quotes are fine, but they should be a minimum compared to the portion you've written yourself. Sorry if I came off as harsh earlier, you've obviously done a lot of work with this and I'm sure that you'll become a great contributor.
 * Oh and also if you make two colons when you reply to this (like ::) that will indent your post more than mine; it makes it easier for us and others to follow the convo. Thanks! Carl.bunderson (talk) 22:05, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks again for your input. It will take another ten years or so for me to distill the stuff I've notated. A Georgian (talk) 02:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * To be fair, it's not even appropriate to put any one way exegetical approaches in any Wikipedia article, whether one line or ten pages. The number of publishes exegetical analyzes on 1 Corinthians is absurd, and to assert that this is necessarily the right way to view it is audacious and scholastically irresponsible. Covinben (talk) 21:49, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


 * If by "one way exegetical approaches" you mean "one-sided exegetical approach" I beg to point out that I used three fairly disparate commentaries, The Interpreter's Bible (1955), Adam Clarke's (1831), and The New Jerome Biblical Commentary (1991) precisely in order to have a sampling of different points of view; there is no implication that there is any one "right way to view" the material, and, therefore, less audacity and irresponsibility than would otherwise be the case. A Georgian (talk) 22:24, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I do apologize for my former post in part. I did not actually mean it to sound so aggressive, especially near the end. I do respect the fact that you work from different types of interpretive works on the letter. What I meant to assert, and hopefully I will do so better this time, is that the spectrum is nearly to broad to do it justice on Wikipedia. You might have to write a short book on a Wikipedia article to pull it off. Nonetheless, extreme kudos for the work you did and how extensive it is. My only concern is that in such a short span it would seem nearly impossible to include historical-critical approach, cultural engagement, literary criticism, redaction criticism, genre criticism, discourse analysis, and quite a few other elements of the textual study which greatly influence the interpretation of the text. And I do, of course, admit that you did a very extensive verse-by-verse work here that I do appreciate. Once again, I apologize for my previous post. I did not mean to be as difficult as it came across being. Covinben (talk) 15:15, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality?
What's with the tag on the front? I see nothing here on the talk page to warrant it? Unless I'm just missing it.. could someone enlighten me? T B erg  Drop a Line ޗ pls  04:58, 22 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, the edit summary in which it was added reads: "POV tag because of the many references to an ill-supported and single sided interpretation. Scholarly material is plentiful and yet no balance is recognized here." But, I read over the article and I see no glaring problems. I'd be fine with taking it down, personally. Carl.bunderson (talk) 03:04, 25 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Took it down. Carl.bunderson (talk) 18:20, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

The Content section is not neutral. After a summary of 1 Corinthians, this unrelated and completely out of place commentary appears,

"According to a writer cited by the author of the Easton's Bible Dictionary, this epistle

shows the powerful self-control of the apostle in spite of his physical weakness, his distressed circumstances, his incessant troubles, and his emotional nature. It was written, he tells us, in bitter anguish, "out of much affliction and pressure of heart ... and with streaming eyes" (2 Cor 2:4); yet he restrained the expression of his feelings, and wrote with a dignity and holy calm which he thought most calculated to win back his erring children. It gives a vivid picture of the early church ... It entirely dissipates the dream that the apostolic church was in an exceptional condition of holiness of life or purity of doctrine.

The author of the Easton's article concludes, "Many Christians today still find this letter to speak to modern-day problems within church communities."

If comments like this are to be included they should be in another section along with other opinions, both positive and negative.

Personally, I would remove it since we don't even know who, "a writer cited by the author of the Easton's Bible Dictionary," is. Louieoddie (talk) 14:07, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

I removed the section I mentioned above. Accordingly, I have also removed the neutrality banner that I had placed at the beginning of the content section. I still think it lacks neutrality and varying points of view. I think the whole article does. It also lacks citations. The whole article reads more like a sermon or an apologetic than an encyclopedia article. I have added a new banner to the top of the entire article that will hopefully encourage more people to contribute. Louieoddie (talk) 02:46, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Language
What is the original language of this book of the bible? Generally, I would have assumed that all books of the bible were written in either Hebrew or Aramaic. All the books of the Jewish Bible are, as far as I am aware. If this was originally in Greek, this should be made explicit, so that those (like myself) who are not Christian and are reading it will understand that quotes from this book, in Greek, reflect the original, and not a Septuagint translation of Hebrew/Aramaic. LordAmeth (talk) 19:34, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Greek A Georgian (talk) 13:43, 3 July 2009 (UTC)


 * This should be made more explicit in the article. Thanks! LordAmeth (talk) 03:45, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I had prepared a wordier response but must have forgotten to save it. All of the New Testament books were written in Greek, although there is some speculation that the author of Matthew had before him a gospel in Hebrews (or Aramaic) called the Gospel to the Hebrews (not to be confused with the Epistle to the Hebrews). The synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) are supposed to have benefited from proto documents such as the Saying of Jesus, and narratives (designated by their imputers Q, M, etc.) which may have been in Hebrew (and/or) Aramaic, and these, in turn would have gone back to oral traditions and/or actual quotations from Hebrew (and/or Aramaic).  There are entire schools of theologians devoted to these matters.  I was intrigued by the theory expounded by (but not original to)the late Dr. Robert Lindsey in his introduction to his translation of Mark into Hebrew, that in translating the New Testament from Greek into Hebrew one encounters expressions which are awkward in Greek but idiomatic in Hebrew, and, therefore, probably authentic traces of the actual words of Jesus, creating the possibility that one might, in the late Professor David Flusser's words, hear his voice!  I'll add one last note regarding translation at the risk of losing your attention; I think that the care to which translators have gone to remain faithful to the texts influenced the vocabulary and very syntax of English, since for centuries the only book available to hoi polloi was the Bible. A Georgian (talk) 13:05, 4 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Very interesting stuff. Thanks for taking the time to write that out. LordAmeth (talk) 13:19, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Charity
In this epistle, Paul breaks with the Pharisaic belief that justice is the highest virtue, and elevates instead charity. Around the same year Paul wrote this epistle, the stoic philosopher Seneca wrote De Clementia, also replacing the stoic virtue of justice with that of mercy. Has anyone ever suggested that paul was influenced by Seneca? Or perhaps that there was just tome new discourse privileging charity or mercy, emerging in the Roman world? Slrubenstein  |  Talk 23:54, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Article quality
I wonder about the focus and quality here given that it starts by saying this includes "some of the most famous phrases" of the NT and then neglects the most famous of all, 1 Corinthians 11:24: This is my body, which is for you: this do in remembrance of me.. If that is missing, I wonder how many more errors there are.... History2007 (talk) 19:46, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Instead of wondering and criticising, why not make the addition you are suggesting? LADave (talk) 23:23, 7 June 2011 (UTC)


 * My watchlist says: "You have 1,235 pages on your watchlist", so this page has to wait. I have 200 other pages I have to fix first. And on my salary here, this will take time. I will eventually get to it, if I can not get anyone to do it for free first. History2007 (talk) 23:32, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

No discussion of the original manuscripts where (and when) the text was found
All the discussion is about content and interpretation, none about where and when were the original texts found, in which manuscripts, and who do they compare? Tremendous oversight in an scholarly article. --ROO BOOKAROO

To be clearer: there seems to be four sets of dates related to this document: --ROO BOOKAROO (talk) 13:28, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Estimated dates of writing: fairly covered in the article, but with little discussion of any related controversy.
 * Date when the document is first mentioned as appearing in the historical record: Marcion collection (Apostolikon)?
 * Dates of inclusion in the canon.
 * Dates of the earliest manuscripts: key fragments, and totality of the epistle, with attendant controversies about reliability of the text.
 * Any discussion by the Dutch Radicals, who made a specialty of criticizing Paul's epistles?

Bad Hat note
I cannot change the code, dont know how, the page does not need to mention a football team as it does not bear the same name, the disambig link is enough.--Inayity (talk) 16:02, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Undisputed Authorship
The first line of the authorship section of this article is as follows,

"There is consensus among historians and Christian theologians that Paul is the author of the First Epistle to the Corinthians, classifying its authorship as "undisputed" (see Authorship of the Pauline epistles)."

You will notice that no names are given for these historians or theologians. Instead of including any in-line citations there is a link to an article on Wikipedia. The section in the referenced article that addresses this book of the New Testament does not agree with this article or even with itself. As you can see,

"Undisputed epistles

The name "undisputed" epistles represents the traditional scholarly consensus asserting that Paul authored each letter.[1][2] However, even the least disputed of letters, such as Galatians, have found critics.[12] Moreover, the unity of the letters is questioned by some scholars. First and Second Corinthians have garnered particular suspicion, with some scholars, among them Edgar Goodspeed and Norman Perrin, supposing one or both texts as we have them today are actually amalgamations of multiple individual letters. There remains considerable discussion as to the presence of possible significant interpolations. However, such textual corruption is difficult to detect and even more so to verify, leaving little agreement as to the extent of the epistles' integrity. See also Radical Criticism, which maintains that the external evidence for attributing any of the letters to Paul is so weak, that it should be considered that all the letters appearing in the Marcion canon were written in Paul's name by members of the Marcionite Church and were afterwards edited and adopted by the Catholic Church.

These seven letters are quoted or mentioned by the earliest of sources, and are included in every ancient canon, including that of Marcion (c.140).[13] There is no record of scholarly doubt concerning authorship until the 19th century when, around 1840, German scholar Ferdinand Christian Baur accepted only four of the letters bearing Paul's name as genuine, which he called the Hauptebriefe (Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, and Galatians). Hilgenfeld (1875) and H. J. Holtzmann (1885) instead accepted the seven letters listed above, adding Philemon, 1 Thessalonians, and Philippians. Few scholars have argued against this list of seven epistles, which all share common themes, emphasis, vocabulary and style. They also exhibit a uniformity of doctrine concerning the Mosaic Law, Christ, and faith."

The First paragraph disagrees with this article and the second paragraph appears to be arguing with the first. I assume that the referenced article originally agreed with this article but with the changing nature of Wikipedia it would really be better to rely on outside sources.

Also, the first paragraph in the reference would perhaps suggest that this article should not represent the authorship of 1 Corinthians as completely undisputed since apparently it is not. Louieoddie (talk) 12:31, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Original Research
The second paragraph of the "Composition" section has no in-line citation at all, outside of bible references. It includes sentences like these,

"This statement, in turn, is CLEARLY REMINISCENT of Paul's Second Missionary Journey, when Paul traveled from Corinth to Ephesus, before going to Jerusalem for Pentecost (cf. Acts 18:22). THUS, IT IS POSSIBLE that I Corinthians was written during Paul's first (brief) stay in Ephesus, at the end of his Second Journey, usually dated to early 54 AD." (Caps added for emphasis)

There are no scholarly references. Clearly someone's opinions are being expressed but who's? It looks to be someones independent research using mostly a bible. Louieoddie (talk) 13:23, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Epistle to the Romans which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 16:29, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Widely Believed to be Interpolated?
However, the epistle does contain a passage that is widely believed to have been interpolated into the text by a later scribe: As in all the churches of the saints, women should be silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as the law also says. If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.

— 1 Corinthians 14:34–35, NRSV

Is this accurate. This study describes things as an 'hypothesis'. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/014610790003000204 I am unsure that this is closed to being a settled issue, but I have not done much research in this area. Thoughts? Thanks Bedfordres (talk) 18:56, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

1 Corinthians 1x articles restored
The 1 Corinthians 1, 1 Corinthians 2, 1 Corinthians 3, 1 Corinthians 4, 1 Corinthians 5, 1 Corinthians 6, 1 Corinthians 7, 1 Corinthians 8, 1 Corinthians 9, 1 Corinthians 10, 1 Corinthians 11, 1 Corinthians 12, 1 Corinthians 13, 1 Corinthians 14, 1 Corinthians 15,1 Corinthians 16 had been restored from the redirects here to full former size by. This has created a large amount of duplication. I think that the listed articles should be WP:BLARed again, but have not seen any discussion on the merge here performed by. If someone knows had seen the discussion, let me know. Викидим (talk) 22:08, 22 June 2024 (UTC)


 * See Talk:1 Corinthians 15. Pinging Викидим (talk) 22:16, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Your edit summaries don't give a reason for restoring articles for every chapter; can you shed any light on that? Most of the material there simply goes verse by verse and either repeats the content (which readers could get by simply reading the chapter itself) or gives fairly uninformative POV commentary on it from a single source. The material I found informative and neutral is often repeated across every chapter article, which is why I merged them all into the article on the book. These articles were all created by a banned user who habitually added excessive amounts of content. -- Beland (talk) 01:16, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * There really is no discussion about merging these articles, as cited above by . Unjustified mergers should not be encouraged, considering that articles are created to be expanded, not to be deleted. Universally disseminated religious books have a large number of readers interested in different interpretations, considering that the most discussed topics always have broad discussions. In the case of faith, with many theories and interpretations, there is no way to state that there are essentially neutral materials, and in this way these articles can be widely expanded. Concentrating subjects of a completely different nature in the same article is not interesting, and it is better to separate them into chapters, which makes it easier for readers. I agree that citing only the verses does not make sense and could be excluded from the article.User7778 (talk) 02:59, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Mergers without previous discussion are officially encouraged. Merging says: "Any editor can perform a merge. No permission or discussion is needed if you think the merge is uncontroversial; just do it (but it might get reverted)." Since there is an objection raised, I'm happy to discuss the pros and cons.
 * Let's start with the first chapter, 1 Corinthians 1. I have just removed all the material that only represents a single, non-notable POV commenting on a single verse, or which simply repeats the content of the verse. It looks to me that this article now triggers several of the recommended reasons for merging:
 * 2 - Overlap - The article is now a 100% overlap with First Epistle to the Corinthians, and consists only of formulaic text repeated for each chapter.
 * 3 - Short text - The article is not long enough to stand on its own as an interesting read, making navigation of Bible articles somewhat more cluttered.
 * 5 - Context - The background in First Epistle to the Corinthians is important to understanding the authorship, audience, and purpose of the book. Seeing the chapter in the context of the other chapters of the book is more helpful than just getting information about it standalone. It also makes it easier to have a more balanced article that reflects both Christian and non-Christian views, which is required for neutrality.
 * Even after merging all the chapter articles into it, First Epistle to the Corinthians is under 3,200 words of prose, which is well under the WP:SIZERULE guideline of 6,000 words for a splitting threshold. It's fine with me if you want to expand it, but that article has plenty of room to grow before it actually needs to be split up. It's also unclear that if the time ever comes that it does need to be split up, that it should be split into per-chapter articles. Sometimes a single verse deserves its own article because it's theologically important and has sparked notable debate or schism (for example, Johannine Comma), and other times parts of several chapters are spun off into a single subarticle because they are closely related (for example, Fall of man). -- Beland (talk) 04:29, 23 June 2024 (UTC)