Letters to the Corinthians

 

​

19.1 Introduction

 

There is good evidence to suggest that Paul corresponded with the Jesus-followers living in Corinth more often than with any other community he founded. With the help of the chronology in Acts, we can assume that Paul’s relationship with the city and its house church (or cluster of house churches) lasted for about seven years—from around 50 CE when he founded the church to about 57 CE when he made his final stop in the city on his way to Jerusalem.

 

Apart from the first eighteen months, which were devoted to the founding of the congregation, much of Paul’s interaction was through letters and occasional visits. It is difficult to integrate some of the details about Paul’s stay in Corinth recorded in Acts 18, such as the violent opposition of the Jews and Paul’s tribunal hearing before Gallio (proconsul of Achaia). Nevertheless, Paul must have created close relationships with the believers since he affectionately regards himself as their “father through the gospel” (1 Cor 4:15). He personally baptized some of the founding members, namely Crispus, Gius, and the household of Stephanus who are described as “the first converts of Achaia” (1 Cor 1:14–16; 16:15). According to Acts, Aquila and Priscilla can be also included among the founding members (Acts 18:1–18; cf. 1 Cor 16:19).

 

For Paul, the founding of the Corinthian church was his “work in the Lord” and the “seal of apostleship” (1 Cor 9:1–2). The early converts were probably intrigued not only by Paul’s preaching, but also by his “demonstration of the Spirit and of power” (1 Cor 2:4), which may coincide with his performance of “signs and wonders and mighty works,” which he associates with being a “true apostle” (2 Cor 12:12). After Paul left Corinth for unknown reasons, he left his co-worker Apollos in charge to continue the growth of the ministry (1 Cor 3:6).

 

Despite his close and extended connections, the Corinthian congregation was riddled with ethical, interpersonal, and theological disputes. In 1 Corinthians, we get a glimpse into this turbulent congregational life, which has fascinated scholars interested in the social dynamics of earliest Christianity. Paul’s response to the range of issues, such as sexual promiscuity, misuse of spiritual gifts, offerings to idols, and a leadership vacuum, allows us to see how he understood Christian communal identity, and its practices and rituals, like baptism and the Eucharist, in relation to its pagan culture. The letter reveals how Paul pragmatically practiced his theology within congregational ministry as he sought to develop spiritual unity and maturity.

 

Some of the issues in this letter resonate for many Christian today who find themselves in socially diverse congregations that attempt to navigate a devout life challenged by cultural pressures. In 2 Corinthians, Paul addresses fewer inter-congregational issues, but his interpersonal conflict with the Corinthians escalates. While the letter includes many commendations and gratitude for the congregation’s commitment to Paul’s teaching and authority, it also includes very strong condemnations. How these shifts in Paul’s message cohere with each other in the same letter is discussed below.

 

The broader social context of Corinth plays an important role in understanding the issues that faced the congregation. Corinth became one of the most prosperous cities in the ancient world. During the first-century CE, it was the capital and largest city of the Roman province, Achaia, which today is part of Greece.

 

In Paul’s day, it is estimated that urban Corinth had eight thousand residents with another twenty thousand residing in the surrounding countryside. It was ideally located on the famous isthmus (a narrow strip of sea-surrounded land dividing two larger bodies of land), which separated the Ionian and Aegean Seas. In order to improve transportation, there were several attempts in antiquity—some by Roman emperors like Nero—to build a canal connecting the two seas, but none were successful. The Corinthians resourcefully placed ports on either side of the isthmus and built a road between them in order to transport the cargo of large vessels. Smaller vessels were not unloaded, but transported along the six-kilometer road across rollers. The port-to-port service, powered by slave labour, was tremendously profitable to transportation companies because it shortened the longer sea journey and avoided rough seas at the foot of the Greek peninsula.

 

Corinth was well known throughout the empire for several reasons. First, the city was famous for its production of “Corinthian bronze (or brass)” which was a highly valued compound of precious metals (including copper, gold and silver) used in the production of cherished objects such as vases and statues. Second, since Corinth was economically vibrant, it had the reputation of attracting entrepreneurs who could employ their capital in a variety of thriving business ventures. The opportunities appealed equally to those who wanted to seize on the opportunity to climb social ladders through legal and illegal means. Third, like other large port cities, Corinth had the reputation of welcoming new philosophical, religious, and social ideas and expressions. Archaeological evidence, like the discovery of coin deposits, points to a vibrant pagan culture that revered deities like Zeus, Heracles and Dionysus.

 

Since the honouring of the gods was linked with political prosperity, the Roman state encouraged cultic worship and festivals and even funded the restoration of the Asclepeion, which was a sanctuary dedicated to the healing god Asclepius, who was known as the son of Apollo. Corinth had an ancestral connection with the Julian-Claudian dynasty (which comprised of Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius and Nero) since it was founded by Julius Caesar (the adoptive father and great uncle of Augustus) as a Roman colony in 44 BCE after its destruction a century earlier. This meant that the worship of Asclepius also showed reverence to Augustus and the Empire. It was a cosmopolitan city that brought with it positive and negative consequences. By the time Paul entered the city, it was known for its expressions of decadence and self-indulgence. The city boasted in its many entertainment offerings, including theatres, casinos and brothels. The expression “to act like a Corinthian” was slang in some parts of the Empire for engaging in sexual promiscuity.

 

Finally, Corinth was well known for hosting the “Isthmian Games,” which rivalled the renowned Athenian Olympian Games. Although Corinth and Athens were geographically close and shared in the same sporting reputation, they were socially and ideologically at odds with one another. Since the resettling of Corinth by freed slaves in the middle of the first century BCE, the residence of Athens viewed the Corinthians as a lower-class of people in contrast to their own perceived sophistication. This caricature of the Corinthian residents is famously expressed by the first-century Greek poet Crinagoras of Mytilene, who writes, “What inhabitants, O luckless city, have you received? And in place of whom? Alas for the great calamity to Greece! … Such a crowd of scoundrelly slaves!” (Greek Anthology 9.284)

​

​

First Corinthians

 

19.2 Authorship, Place, and Date

 

Paul’s authorship of 1 Corinthians is not in dispute. At the beginning of the letter, Paul identifies himself as “a called apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God,” which is meant to convey his authority. As is often the case in Paul’s letters, he also includes his associate(s), who is here identified as “Sosthenes, the brother” (1Cor 1:1). It is not clear who Sosthenes was, but his designation as a brother conveys that he is a fellow believer and at the same time distanced from the title “apostle.”

​

Paul writes to the Corinthian Jesus-followers as an absent apostolic leader who continues to exercise his role, albeit with frustration. In addition to addressing the turbulent issues, both Corinthian letters are written to encourage the congregation not to abandon its participation in Paul’s fundraising effort for the impoverished believers in Jerusalem, which was a major concern during his Aegean ministry. The reluctance of the Corinthians to participate must have added to an already strained situation precipitated by the arrival of competing Jewish Christian missionaries, who are addressed in 2 Corinthians.

​

When read in sequence, the letters express an increasingly deteriorating relationship that Paul desperately wants to repair. The personal tone in both letters reveals Paul’s attitude toward the congregation(s), his missionary practices, and his rhetorical strategy for winning (and correcting) his audience. Conversely, much is also learned about the perceptions of Paul by his congregants and rival missionaries.

​

The designations “1” and “2” Corinthians gives the impression that these are the only letters that Paul wrote to Corinth. In addition, the designations can imply that they are self-contained letters independent of one another. A closer reading, however, indicates that Paul corresponded with the Corinthians more often. How often he wrote to them (and they wrote to him) is difficult to say. In 1 Cor 5:9, Paul briefly refers to a previous letter that asked the Corinthian believers not to associate with “sexually immoral people.” This letter may have been answered as part of the report given to Paul from “Chloe’s people” about the quarrels within the congregation (1 Cor 1:11). Alternatively, it may be a reference to a personal visit. Additional references to other correspondences appear in 2 Corinthians, which are discussed in more detail below.

​

The issue becomes even more complicated when 1 and 2 Corinthians are viewed as composites of smaller letters, which has been a topic of debate since the eighteenth century. If they are composites, then the number of correspondences expands. Another possible explanation for the unevenness in 1 Corinthians is that it was composed over a prolonged period of time in the context of a chaotic and hectic ministry.

​

Despite the number of correspondences, when we encounter 1 Corinthians, we are joining a conversation that spanned several years.

​

​

Info Box 19.1

Is 1 Corinthians a Combination of Smaller Letters?

​

Given the irregular flow and frequent topical shifts in 1 Corinthians, some scholars question whether it was originally written as we have it today. They argue that much of the letter reflects the original composition by Paul, but notice that select passages may have been added later. For example, 1 Cor 10:1–22 may have been a separate letter (or part of one) that was later inserted by an editor into what is now 1 Corinthian since it disrupts the flow of Paul’s discussion of the believer’s freedom from ethnic practices (Jewish and Gentile). When it is bypassed, a more consistent flow is restored. A second example is 1 Corinthians 13, which is often called “the love chapter.” It too may have been a separate letter (or part of one) since it appears to break the continuity of Paul’s discussion on spiritualized expressions in chapters 12 and 14.

​

Some scholars propose that 1 Corinthians is the product of editing that took shape after Paul’s death. While several reconstructions offered of the hypothetical underlying letters, one proposal is as follows:

​

Letter A consisted of 10:1–22; 6:12–20; 11:2–34.

Letter B consisted of 7:1–9:23; 10:23–11:1; 12–15; 16.

Letter C consisted of 1:1–6:11.

​

Not all scholars, however, agree with this or similar compositional reconstructions. A strong case, for example, is presented by Margaret Mitchell who argues that the letter is unified from the start. She argues that the topics vary greatly because Paul wants to make the case for a unified church despite its many challenges.

​

​

If we take 1 Corinthians as a unified whole, then Paul’s reference to Ephesus at the end of the letter (1 Cor 16:8) identifies his location. This can be linked with the account of Paul’s travels in the book of Acts. In Acts 18–19, Luke records that Paul stayed in Corinth during his second missionary journey for at least eighteen months, which would place him in the city somewhere between 50 and 53 CE. Subsequently, according to Acts, Paul travelled eastward across the Aegean Sea and remained for a while in Ephesus sometime between 53–57 CE.

 

​

19.3 Audience

 

We know more about the Corinthian congregation than any other audience to which Paul wrote. In addition to the letters themselves, we can glean insights from Romans (especially chapters 15–16) and 1 Thessalonians (and possibly Galatians) since these were written in Corinth. The geographical and social origin of a writing can sometimes unveil additional perspectives for reconstructing the author’s situation. Luke also provides information about Paul’s founding visit to Corinth in Acts 18:1–17. Finally, the late first-century letter written to the Corinthians, 1 Clement, provides insights into the situation of the congregants four decades later.

​

One of the enduring mysteries is the size of the congregation. As mentioned above, it is not clear if the Corinthian believers consisted of a cluster of house churches that gathered as one congregation or were simply a single house church. If we assume the latter, then the church was riddled with interpersonal and ethical problems that required intervention. Given all of the problems that Paul addresses, the modern reader might assume that the congregation numbered in the hundreds, but if they indeed met in one house church, then there may not have been more than 30 congregants if the patron owned a villa. If the house was smaller, then the congregation may have numbered in the teens.

​

In the letter itself, there is considerable detail about the composition of Paul’s audience. The majority of Paul’s converts appear to have been from the lower classes as is suggested in his comment, “not many of you were wise by human standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth” (1 Cor 1:26). By implication, a minority may have been well-educated, influential, and of noble birth. The economic diversity partly explains the social conflicts that Paul addresses.

​

One example is the conflict related to communal meals (1 Cor 11:17–34). Paul chastises the congregation for its lack of unity when they come to celebrate the Lord’s Supper. Instead of participating as a unified body of believers, some congregants were arriving at different times, feasting and drinking with no concern for others. Socio-economic diversity might explain the root to the problem. Wealthy believers could arrive early to the meals because they enjoyed more leisure time. Whereas the poorer believers, especially if they were slaves, were under more time constraints and probably arrived well after the others had finished.

​

The diversity also extended to ethnicity. While the congregation was predominantly Gentile (1 Cor 12:2), it also included Jewish believers. For example, Paul lived and worked in the tentmaking trade with a married couple, Priscilla and Aquila, who were fellow Jewish believers (Acts 18:2–3; cf. 1 Cor 16:19). In addition, Paul mentions Crispus and Sosthenes who were leaders of Jewish synagogues before being baptized (1 Cor 1:14 cf. Acts 18:8 and 1 Cor 1:1 cf. Acts 18:17). The social integration of members from different economic, social, and ethnic groups contributed to the tensions that faced a community which was struggling with unification and spiritual maturity.

​

The Corinthians Say:

“All things are lawful” (6:12)

Paul Responds

“Not all things are beneficial” (6:12)

​

​

The Corinthians Say:

“Food is meant for the body, and the body for food” (i.e., it is only natural to satisfy one’s appetites) (6:13)

Paul Responds:

“God will destroy both” (i.e., God will judge people who satisfy sinful appetites) (6:13)

​

​

The Corinthians Say:

“It is well for a man not to touch a woman” (i.e. even married persons should practice celibacy) (7:1–5)

Paul Responds:

Husbands and wives should grant each other conjugal rights, lest there be temptations for sexual immorality (7:1–5)

​

​

The Corinthians Say:

“All of us possess knowledge” (8:1)

Paul Responds:

“Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up” (8:1)

​

​

The Corinthians Say:

Speaking in tongues is a sign for unbelievers (14:22–23)

Paul Responds:

Unbelievers who hear you speaking in tongues will think that you are crazy (14:22–23)

​

​

​

​

19.4 The Purpose and the Central Role of the Resurrection of the Dead

 

Since the letter is a response to a series of problems that have caused instability and fragmentation in the Corinthian congregation, it is not focussed on any one dominant issue. However, it can be argued that there is a root cause that gave rise to all the other issues because it targets the congregation’s new identity in Christ. It becomes explicit toward the end of the letter (1 Corinthians 15) when Paul strenuously responds to the Corinthians’ misunderstanding of the resurrection.

​

It can be surmised from Paul’s lengthy response that many of the congregants did not believe in the resurrection of the dead because they saw themselves as already living in a resurrected state. They viewed their charismatic experiences, like speaking in tongues and prophesying, as expressions of the resurrected life and in turn may have considered their questionable behaviour as inconsequential. By exaggerating their resurrected state, they separated the spiritual from the physical and thereby considered the actions that were done “in the body” as having no impact on their communal life “in Christ.”

​

In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul begins by summarizing his gospel message, that Christ was resurrected from the dead. This becomes the basis for addressing a widespread belief among the Corinthians that “there is no resurrection of the dead” (1 Cor 15:12). The Corinthians, however, did not appear to have a problem with the idea of resurrection in and of itself. Their problem lay in its occurrence after death, which is where they diverged from Paul. For the Corinthians, resurrection was a current state of affairs that was being manifested in their community. As a result, there was no need to await a future resurrection after death. Their view was not that dissimilar from pockets of other early believers.

​

​

Info Box 19.3

Resurrection before Death?

 

Many modern readers correctly assume that conceptions of resurrection in antiquity required a literal or biological death that led to new forms of embodiment. This was Paul’s view and was commonly shared by his Jewish contemporaries. However, it was not the only view among the earliest Jesus-followers.  

​

When historians investigate to see if there was some cohesive idea about the resurrection of the dead in early Christianity, they find a variegated world of ambiguity that even envelops concepts of death. For example, the Finish biblical scholar Outi Lehtipuu has convincingly shown that the resurrection of the dead is not always conceived as a physical phenomenon nor is it always limited to post-mortem existence (e.g. John 5:25–29). It may refer to a transformed existence, but not to the ultimate outcome for humanity.

​

One of the ways that early Christian conceptions incorporated a temporal paradox that enabled them to participate in resurrection, while still alive, was through the ritual of baptism. While Paul only associated baptism with a new life freed from the bondage of sin before resurrection, some of his (perhaps former) followers viewed baptism as a participation in the resurrected life (Col 2:12–13).

​

Others, however, appeared to have opposed the idea that “the resurrection has already taken place” (2 Tim. 2:16–18). Since views differed, the nature of the resurrected form dominated the debate in some sectors of early Christian thought.

​

​

In response, Paul reminds his congregants that the tradition they received—that Christ was raised from the dead—should correct their divergent view and guide their faith going forward (1 Cor 15:3–11). He infers that if there is no (future) post-mortem resurrection, then Christ did not rise from the dead at all. And if Christ was not raised from the dead, then Paul’s gospel message has been preached in vain and the Corinthians’ faith has been futile (1 Cor 15:13–19).

​

Paul conceives of resurrection as a wholistic transformation that does not allow for the retention of an earthly body, which directly confronts the Corinthian belief. He explains that the nature of Christ’s resurrected body should serve as a precedent for what will happen to the believer’s body in the future resurrection of the dead (1 Cor 15:20), which he believed would happen during his own lifetime (1 Cor 15:51–52).

​

Paul argues that Christ was transformed from having a perishable “flesh and blood” body to a non-perishable “spiritual body” when he was raised (1 Corinthians 15:42–50). While Christ’s spiritual body still retained its physicality since his earthly form was recognizable to his followers, it is hard to know how Paul conceived of that physicality and its state in heaven.

​

It is no surprise that many scholars have struggled to find cohesion within Paul’s thought on the nature of the resurrected body. Our questions, however, are not Paul’s questions. Paul was probably less interested in constructing a theology of the resurrection, and much more interested in responding to the practical implications stemming from the Corinthians’ belief about it.

​

While 1 Corinthians addresses more issues than any of the other Pauline letters, like them it contains a theological reflection that arises out of troubled situations and fragmented relationships. The critical reflections about the death and resurrection of Christ, and their implications for a new kind of humanity (consisting of Jews and Gentiles) that is supposed to be unified like the parts of a human body, takes shape through a whole range of negative and positive experiences that Paul encountered.

​

As a broader principle, the purpose of this letter, like that of his others, is not only to resolve the pending issues, but to instill a way of thinking about an identity in Christ that affects positive relationship within the community and with God.

​

Paul knew well that patterns of belief directly affect patterns of behavior. This is why some scholars have referred to Paul’s theology as a “problem-based theology” that is formulated from the ground up so that it can be lived out. It is also why many scholars view Paul primarily as a pastor (as opposed to an academic theologian) who grounded his preaching in the believer’s participation “in Christ,” which not only identified a new people of God that awaited the imminent return of Jesus, but also a conception of ideal humanness.

 

​

​

19.5 Themes

​

A Disunified Church

​

One of Paul’s pleas throughout the letter is that the Corinthian Jesus-followers abandon their hostility toward each other and be unified as a community “in Christ” (1 Cor 1:10–11; 11:18–19). The disunity appears to have been somewhat organized. Some congregants were aligning themselves with various factions, which presumably had their own leaders. Paul writes that some aligned themselves with Apollos (1 Cor 1:12; 3:4–6, 22; 4:6; 16:12; cf. Acts 18:24–19:1; Titus 3:13), others with Cephas or Peter (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22; 9:5; 15:5; cf. Gal. 2:7–9, 11–14), and others still with Paul. Instead of supporting the “Paul faction” and viewing the others as rivals, he condemns the fragmentation because all of these leaders, which God provided, contribute to a common mission (1 Cor 3:5–7).

​

Paul’s conception of their unity is conveyed through two images. First, he refers to the community as “the temple of God” (1 Cor 3:16–17). As a community, they are a holy place where God’s Spirit dwells. Disunity violates the sanctity of God’s holy dwelling among his people. Second, Paul refers to the community as “the body of Christ” whereby the individual members are portrayed metaphorically as body parts, such as hands, arms, legs, and feet. Though the parts have different functions, they are all members of, and contribute to, one body (1 Cor 12:12–27). Consequently, when one part of the body suffers, the whole body suffers.

​

​

Chasing Earthly Wisdom and Power

​

The Corinthian Jesus-followers appear to have been obsessed with the pursuit of worldly wisdom and power. The Greek word for wisdom is sophia, which along with its related terms occur twenty-five times in the first three chapters. Paul presents the earthly origin of sophia as incongruous with the imminent return of Christ and its ultimate significance. Since, for Paul, worldly wisdom and power, which did not recognize God, is fleeting, it is incomparable with the power and wisdom of God awaiting those who are “being saved.”

​

Worldly or human wisdom is “foolishness to Gentiles” and a “stumbling block to Jews” because it can never grasp the divine wisdom revealed through Christ’s crucifixion (1 Cor 1:18, 23–24). Paul challenges the Corinthians to think in ways that are contrary to the constructs of the world, which requires humility and a realization that God does not work through the proud and strong, but through those that the world considers weak and foolish (1:18–29; 2:14; 3:18–20). Failing to see this, obscures the power of the resurrection from the dead and the return of Christ.

​

Understanding the difference between human wisdom and divine wisdom has significant implication for how the congregation identifies itself and how it forms its expectations. The implications, for example, can be applied to how Paul perceives leadership in distinction from the Corinthians, who are swayed by popular opinion. While the Corinthians are divided in their loyalites to different leaders, Paul advocates that true leadership should reflect the way of the cross, which elevates service and suffering over and against self-boasting and self-aggrandizement. Paul attempts to radically alter the congregants’ thinking about God who revealed himself in the suffering and death of Christ, which is the pinnacle of obedience, service, and love from God’s perspective.

​

Though the cross makes no sense to human logic since it conveys failure, weakness and ultimate defeat, it is the very place where God reveals his power and wisdom. The inversion of human expectation could not be more blatant: God’s love for the world enables violent suffering and death of his son to be redemptive. Yet, this is only known through revelation of the Spirit and not through human wisdom.

​

Paul is convinced that if the Corinthians approach their divisions from the perspective of the cross and by participating in the cross (e.g., in the proper practice of the Lord’s Supper), which is consistent with the faith they initially received, then they will be able to rethink the meaning of wisdom and power which will lead to a stronger and unified community.

​

​

Resurrection “According to the Scriptures” and the Witnesses

​

As noted above, the post-mortem resurrection of the body is the theological epicentre of the letter. Paul’s conceptualization of it begins by reminding the Corinthians that it is the essence of the good news that they “received” and in which they “stand” and through which they are “saved” (1 Cor 15:1–2). Paul does not view himself as the originator of the message, but as a messenger who delivers what he himself received, that Christ died for their sins, was buried, and was raised on the third day “in accordance with the Scriptures” (1 Cor 15:3–4).

​

While Paul believed that his message was in continuity with the Scriptures, and consequently with the heritage of Israel, he provides no quotation or allusion to alert his readers about which passage he has in mind. This reference to Scripture has baffled scholars. One possibility is that he is referring to the entirety of the Scriptures since they are considered to be fulfilled in Christ. Since the Scriptures were the common source of authority for all Jewish groups and many nascent Christian groups, they were zealously appropriated in support of distinct beliefs and practices. In the minds of Paul’s Jewish opponents, the Scriptures did not speak of a Messiah who was to be crucified by the enemies of Israel and then raised from the dead. Instead, it was commonly believed that the Scriptures pointed to a Messiah who will be crowned in Jerusalem and liberate his people from foreign dominance.

​

Paul then goes on the confirm Jesus’ resurrection from the dead by listing an array of witnesses which includes Cephas (Peter), the Twelve, “five-hundred brothers at one time,” James and all the Apostles, and then finally himself (1 Cor 15:5–8). Despite the addition of “and sisters” in some English translations of 1 Cor 15:6 (e.g. NRSV, NIV), Paul does not mention women. If a misunderstanding of resurrection is systemic in the Corinthian congregation, then Paul’s appeal to Scripture, along with the list of witnesses, function to persuade the Corinthians that they are not living in a resurrected state. Since Christ’s resurrection is the model, it will occur after death.

​

​

Info Box 19.4

Conceptions of Afterlife in Paganism

 

In the broader Greco-Roman world, pagan conceptions of afterlife were diverse and often vague, but they did not dominate religious thinking in the same way that one finds in the first-century Christian and Jewish literature. Pagan thought and practice focussed largely on the present life. In a general sense, despite the state of death being imagined by most as a kind of phantom existence, there were three conceptions of afterlife that Paul would have encountered in Corinth.

 

The first is annihilation, which denies post-mortem existence of any kind. This view appears to have been popular as suggested by a large number of tombstones with inscriptions that state that life ends in non-existence. A standard Latin inscription, which was much like our present-day RIP (“Rest in Peace”), was NFNSNC (“I was not, I am not, I care not”).

​

The second conception is disembodied existence, which viewed the human soul or spirit surviving the body. The influence probably stemmed from Plato’s conception of reality which distinguished between pure forms and imperfect copies. The body was viewed as an imperfect copy, experiencing pain and suffering, that ultimately led to death. Conversely, the soul was still a substance, but a pure substance that could not decay. At death, the soul was liberated from the bondage of the body.

​

The third conception was bodily resurrection, which regarded the body not as a prison of the soul, but simply as a fragile vessel that decays. This view, of course, incorporates early Jewish and Christian conceptions, but also includes streams of pagan tradition which included the resurrection of some deities. Second-century Christian apologists like Justin Martyr and Theophilus of Antioch even claimed that Jesus’ resurrection was analogous to the raising of the divine heroes Heracles and Asclepius.

​

​

​

Sexual Morality

 

The Corinthian Jesus-followers were all over the map when it came to sexual morality. Some had no misgivings about visiting prostitutes (1 Cor 6:15–18), whereas others refrained from sex altogether, even in the context of marriage (1 Cor 7:1). Interestingly, each extreme was viewed as contributing to a positive spiritual experience.

​

Those who were sexually active, and even promiscuous by traditional standards, saw no harm in their actions because their physical bodies were no longer considered significant within their conception of Christian identity. It was the spirit, which was distinguished from the body, that was of importance.

​

For those who abstained from sexual activity, they may have done so with the understanding that it pleases God. Sexual activity may have been viewed as a desecration of the body.

​

Paul considers both extremes to be wrong.

​

In response to the promiscuous, he argues that their bodily actions matter (1 Cor 6:13, 15, 19) because they are to please God (1 Cor 6:20). While they may all be “lawful,” they are not all beneficial when the body is viewed as a temple of the Holy Spirit that is to honour God. The believer’s body is no longer his/her own, but belongs to God who purchased it through the sacrifice of Christ.

​

In response to the celibate, he explains that sexual activity within marriage does not violate the body as a temple of the Holy Spirit. While Paul prefers the believers to remain single and celibate, given his expectation of the imminent return of Christ, he views sex within marriage as pleasing to God since the body of each spouse belongs to the other, analogous to the way that the believer’s body belongs to God (1 Cor 7:1–16).

​

The Corinthian error, as has been mentioned several times, lay in their misunderstanding of the resurrected body. Paul addresses the problem by making a distinction between the present earthly body and the spiritual body which is attained in the resurrection. Paul stresses that the pattern is Christ, stating that “God raised the Lord and will also raise us by his power” (1 Cor 6:14). The earthly body will be transformed into a new spiritual body. If Christ is the pattern, then it will be recognizable, though very different. The body will change from the “corruptible” to the “incorruptible” because “flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor 15:50). Paul likens the transformation to a seed that is buried and then rises out of the ground to become a plant (1 Cor 15:37–38).

​

​

Food Sacrificed to Idols

 

For modern Christians, the dedication of food for religious rituals is a difficult concept to grasp. In antiquity, however, it was a widespread practice that conveyed honour, respect and loyalty to gods or God, whose appeasement(s) meant prosperity and peace on a personal, familial, and societal level. In addition to communing with the gods, sacrifices played an important function for maintaining social cohesion. The meat that was sacrificed was often shared over a communal meal.

​

In chapters 8–10, Paul addresses the question whether food sacrificed to idols can be eaten by Jesus-followers. While it is likely that some of the Jesus-followers may have continued to participate in pagan practices, or were members of families and communities that did, the problem that Paul addresses was not limited to these incidents. The concern would have arisen from broader social conventions that affected all of the Jesus-followers. Two stand out.

​

First, every member of an urban society would have been impacted by gestures of resect and worship of deities (sometimes including sacrifices) at public events, such as banquets, weddings, birthdays, and business gatherings. Since Jesus-followers were not sectarian, but were integrated within the broader pagan culture, they would have been invited to participate.

​

Second, since almost all the meat in Greco-Roman markets came from animals that were sacrificed to idols, the problem of its consumption quickly arose among the Corinthian believers. While Paul is not opposed to the believers participating in society, he is restrictive when it comes to associations with those who call themselves believers (taking on the names “brother” or “sister”) and continue in what he considered immoral societal practices (1 Cor 5:10–12).

 

The same principle is applied to the food issue. Meat offered to idols is not in and of itself a problem when one understands that they have no representational capability and that the consumption of the meat has no significance for one’s relationship with God the Father. Instead, the problem arises when believers consuming meat in temples of idols are seen by their “weak” counterparts, for whom it may be a stumbling block that causes an abandonment of their new faith. Paul regards this as a sin against the family of believers because it is a wounding of a weak conscience and consequently a sin against Christ (1 Cor 8:1–9:7).

​

In chapter 10, Paul tackles the same issue in relation to the practice of the Eucharist, which may stem from a different group of opponents. In a seemingly paradoxical response, Paul opposes the eating of meat offered to idols, but he does so only when its consumption is directly linked with its sacrificial origin and meaning. Invoking the example of Israel’s idolatry in the wilderness (I Cor 9:8–10–13), Paul is adamant that a believer cannot consume sacrificial meat in the context of pagan ritual while at the same time participating in the Lord’s Supper which honours the sacrifice of Christ.

​

It is a problem for Paul because the practice of ritual consumption unites the participant with the deity that is being honoured. Eating what is sold in the meat markets is not a problem, however, since it cannot take on devotional meaning. Once again, Paul appeals to each believer’s benevolent conscience as a guide (1 Cor 10:28–29).

​

​

Spiritual Gifts

 

Like most early congregations that Paul established, the one in Corinth was disorganized and lacked clear direction and leadership, which is not surprising since nascent Christianity had no institutional tradition on which to lean. It was a grass-roots movement, consisting of a handful of people. One of the pressing issues that seemed to have guided the Corinthians’ self-identification as “resurrected” Jesus-followers was their experiences of charismatic phenomena which were interpreted as gifts of the Holy Spirit bestowed on the members of the community. Gifts from the Holy Spirit were wide-ranging and were considered to be beneficial to the community collectively (12:7; 11; 14:12, 26). They included wisdom, knowledge, faith, healing, miracles, prophecy, discernment of spirits, speaking in tongues, and their interpretation (12:8–10).

 

The gifts of tongues and prophecy are given more attention than all the others. Of these two, speaking in tongues dominates chapters 12–14. Presumably, it was the most enigmatic, public, and divisive.

​

Ultimately, all the gifts were viewed as a means to enhance faith, hope and especially love—which Paul claims, in chapter 13, should be the dominant characteristics of the congregants.

​

The English term “tongue” is a translation of the Greek glossa, which (apart from the organ in the mouth) can refer either to a known language or ecstatic speech that has no connection with the communicative function of human languages. This type of phenomena, commonly called “glossolalia,” was often associated with religious rituals and was not restricted to early Christian groups. While it is practiced today in some Christian denominations, such as Pentecostalism, it is also found in a few non-Christian religious groups.

 

References to “tongues” are also found in Acts where they take on both meanings. In Acts 2, human languages appear to be implied when language barriers were miraculously removed from celebrants of Pentecost who came to Jerusalem from various parts of the Mediterranean. Yet in other sections of Acts, the experiences of “tongues” appears to refer to ecstatic speech (Acts 10:46; 19:6). In both cases, the experiences appear as singular events, whereas in I Corinthians, speaking in tongues is practiced continually and at will.

 

In 1 Corinthians, Paul clearly endorses the practice, admitting that he speaks in tongues more than any of the congregants (1 Cor 14:18). At the same time, he encourages the exercise of prophecy more than tongues (14:5) because it is not individualistic and edifies the entire community. The Corinthians who participated in tongues-speaking considered it to be the best of the gifts, but it also appears to have been the main driver of divisions because it was not practiced inclusively. Paul is opposed to the public practice of tongues when there is no interpreter to share the message with the community (1 Cor 14:5). If one wishes to speak in tongues, Paul instructs that it be done in private.

​

Since Paul does not associate the practice of “tongues” explicitly with human languages, but with an unknown speech, that Paul rhetorically calls the speech of angels (1 Cor 13:1; 14:2, 9, 23), many scholars argue that we should today think of it as ecstatic speech expressed in contexts of intense emotional worship. A few scholars argue that Paul is referring to a human language—most notably Hebrew. Others have argued that since Corinth was also a multi-ethnic and multi-lingual city, “tongues” can be a reference to a variety of languages that were not commonly known among the congregants, so interpreters would have been required to avert chaotic gatherings. Like the gift of prophecy, which was not about predicting the future, speaking in tongues was a medium for communicating knowledge and revelation about God.

​

​