From: Bruce Terry (terry@bible.acu.edu)
Date: Wed Oct 11 1995 - 11:54:55 EDT
On Wed, 11 Oct 1995, Carl W. Conrad wrote:
>At 4:51 AM 10/11/95, J.D.F.=van=Halsema%BW_KG%TheoFilos@esau.th.vu.nl wrote:
>>Re.: 1 Cor. 1:5-7
>>
>>I would like to make another suggestion as regards the content and function
>>of this passage.
>>In this thanksgiving Paul probably is giving a kind of 'Table of contents' of
>>1 Cor. as a whole. In other words: it has a clear rhetorical function of
>>preparing the readers of what follows.
>>- logos: 1 Cor. 1-4
>>- gnosis: 1 Cor. 8
>>- charisma 1 Cor. 12-14
>>- apokalypsis 1 Cor. 15
>>To be saying that this passage has an ironical mood is a bit premature, I
>>think. Paul refers here to what he has given the audience during the founding
>>[?] visit: true knowledge etc of the true God, mediated by a true apostle (1
>>Cor. 1:1). (But: do they still adhere to this true message, do they still
>>hold Paul as a true apostle? That remains to be seen...)
>
>I think that this is a very reasonable view of the passage.
Interestingly enough, the use of charisma and apokalypsis refer directly to
the main themes of 1 Cor. 12-14 (spiritual gifts) and 1 Cor. 15 (the final
resurrection at the second coming). In my study of 1 Corinthians, these
chapters turned out to be the area of grammatical peak, which appear to
contain a sort of epistolary climax. It is interesting to see these themes
foreshadowed in the thanksgiving.
I do not put as much emphasis on the presence of logos and gnosis, in spite of
Carl's quote from Conzelmann (which I have omitted), since although these
words occur in the chapters indicated above, they are not the primary themes
of chapters 1-4 (division and wisdom) and 8-10 (food offered to idols).
>On the other hand, I am surprised at Kevin Anderson's assertion that the
>glossolalia as a phenomenon of worship must be the same as that described
>in Luke's Pentecost narrative in Acts 2. I think that the glossolalia at
>issue is the same phenomenon referred to in the longer ending of Mark
>(16:17) "GLWSSAIS LALHSOUSIN KAINAIS." KAINAI GLWSSAI can hardly refer to
>known human languages, but Luke in Acts 2 MUST be referring to known human
>languages.
Carl, I am curious as to your assertion: "KAINAI GLWSSAI can hardly refer to
known human languages." It would seem to me that the tongues could be new to
the speaker (and not just languages that are new). But then I come from a
family where we referred to a recently purchased used car as "our new car."
********************************************************************************
Bruce Terry E-MAIL: terry@bible.acu.edu
Box 8426, ACU Station Phone: 915/674-3759
Abilene, Texas 79699 Fax: 915/674-3769
********************************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:30 EDT