USD $166.00
Search Results
Page:12
The Apologetic Context of 2 Corinthians 3
Author:
Scholars have long puzzled over the imagery focused on Moses in 2 Corinthians 3; it is unclear how that imagery fits into the larger context of the letter. Many have explained the imagery as the apostle’s reaction to the “super-apostles,” Jewish missionaries mentioned later in the letter. These preachers, it has been argued, promoted either a θεῖος ἀνήρ or a Judaizing agenda. In Moses in Corinth, Paul B. Duff contends that the Moses imagery has nothing to do with the super-apostles but functions instead as an integral part of Paul’s first apologia sent to Corinth. This apologia, found in 2 Cor 2:14-7:4, represents an independent letter sent to dispel suspicions about the apostle’s honesty, integrity, and poor physical appearance.
The Apologetic Context of 2 Corinthians 3
Author:
Scholars have long puzzled over the imagery focused on Moses in 2 Corinthians 3; it is unclear how that imagery fits into the larger context of the letter. Many have explained the imagery as the apostle’s reaction to the “super-apostles,” Jewish missionaries mentioned later in the letter. These preachers, it has been argued, promoted either a θεῖος ἀνήρ or a Judaizing agenda. In Moses in Corinth, Paul B. Duff contends that the Moses imagery has nothing to do with the super-apostles but functions instead as an integral part of Paul’s first apologia sent to Corinth. This apologia, found in 2 Cor 2:14-7:4, represents an independent letter sent to dispel suspicions about the apostle’s honesty, integrity, and poor physical appearance.
Author:
In:
Moses in Corinth
Author:
Abstract
This chapter introduces the interpretive problems of 2 Corinthians 3. The primary difficulty with 2 Corinthians 3 concerns the role that Paul’s allusions to Exodus 34:29-35 play in the context of the larger section to which the chapter belongs (2:14-7:4). 2 Cor 2:14-7:4 takes the form of an apologia; Paul defends himself against attacks on his physical appearance, his integrity, and his legitimacy as διάκονος (“envoy”) of the deity. In light of that, it is not evident how the allusions to Moses and his ministry in 2 Cor 3:7-18 function. This difficulty is further complicated by two other significant problems, that of the integrity of the letter and the identity of the apostle’s opposition in Corinth. The chapter concludes with a brief outline of the rest of the book.
In:
Moses in Corinth
Author:
Abstract
A review of the various arguments about the integrity of canonical 2 Corinthians from the eighteenth century to the present constitutes the subject of chapter 2. To begin with, five important proposals are examined: 1) the claim for a Zwischenbesuch (“intermediate visit”), a Zwischenbrief (“intermediate letter”), and a Zwischenfall (“intermediate event”); 2) the suggestion that 2 Cor 6:14-7:1 is an interpolation; 3) the claim that chapters 10-13 represents an independent letter; 4) the proposal that chapters 8 and 9 should be separated from the rest of the canonical letter, and 5) the suggestion that 2 Cor 2:14-7:4 represents an independent letter. An evaluation of the current hypotheses about the division of 2 Corinthians follows. The chapter concludes with the determination that 2:14-7:4 (minus 6:14-7:1) was originally an independent letter and that it was one of the earliest letters contained in canonical 2 Corinthians.
In:
Moses in Corinth
Author:
Abstract
The question of the identity of Paul’s opposition opens this chapter. Based on first, the lack of sound evidence and second, the finding that 2 Corinthians 10-13 represents a later letter, there are insufficient grounds for concluding that the “super-apostles” were in Corinth at the time that Paul wrote 2:14-7:4. Rather, the evidence from within 2:14-7:4 indicates that opposition to Paul likely arose from within the community. Paul’s defensiveness arose from suspicions about his honesty and integrity (2:17; 4:2; 6:3; 7:2) and concerns over his poor physical presence (2 Cor 4:7-12; 5:1-10; 6:3-10). These were linked together in the minds of the Corinthians. Paul’s suffering was understood by at least some in the community as God’s punishment for the apostle’s alleged attempt to defraud the community by means of the collection for the Jerusalem church (cf. 6:9).
In:
Moses in Corinth
Author:
Abstract
Paul begins his apologia with the image of himself being “led in triumph” by the deity as a prisoner of war would be led in in triumph by a conquering general. Paul then suddenly switches metaphors, referring to himself as the “scent” of God’s γνῶσις (“knowledge”). The apostle then turns to the subject of his own “fitness” (2:16; 3:5-6). In the midst of that discussion, Paul raises the topic of letters of recommendation (3:1-3). He claims to need no such letters; the Corinthian ἐκκλησία itself represents his commendatory letter. Curiously, in his explication of this point, the apostle points allusively to the Torah (3:3). The section concludes with the claim that first, Paul has been commissioned as a διάκονος of a new covenant—a διακονία of Spirit rather than letter—and second, that the letter kills while the Spirit brings life (3:6). In this chapter, I tie all of these seemingly disparate elements together. Ultimately, I conclude that these first ten verses of the letter have as their focus both the Corinthians’ ability to correctly perceive Paul as a διάκονος of the deity and their ability to perceive their own transformation as resulting from the apostle’s διακονία.
In:
Moses in Corinth
Author:
Abstract
In 2 Cor 3:7-11, Paul alludes to Exod 34:29-35 in the context of an a minore ad maius argument. This argument compares the lawgiver’s διακονία to his own ministry. This chapter questions how such an argument about Moses could fit into Paul’s apology to gentiles. In addition, it raises the question of why Paul would describe Moses’s glorious ministry as a ministry of death and condemnation. I will argue, against the opinion of many, that there is no implicit polemic here against Law observance or Judaism. Rather, Paul here makes the claim that Moses’s ministry had resulted in condemnation and a death sentence for gentiles. Like other Jews of his day, Paul considered the gentiles accountable for the Torah’s commands. In addition to examining passages from ancient Jewish texts, the chapter looks at other passages in Paul’s letters that support the thesis that the apostle believed that, prior to Christ’s death, gentiles were accountable to the Law. Finally, the chapter investigates the possibility that God’s “glory” could be associated with judgment and/or punishment.
In:
Moses in Corinth
Author:
Abstract
Paul begins the last section of 2 Corinthians 3 (vv. 12-18) by again alluding to Exod 34:29-35. Here, however, he focuses on Moses’ veil. Curiously, the apostle depicts Moses in three different ways in this section, and in each case, the veil is involved. First, in 3:12-13, he concentrates on Moses, the veiled διάκονος. Then in 3:14-15, he speaks of “Moses” (i. e., the Torah) as a veiled text. Finally, in 3:16-18, Paul displays the unveiled Moses as a paradigm for the Corinthian believers. Besides Moses, however, Paul also introduces Israel in this section. Israel here serves as a negative model for the Corinthian community. Ultimately, Paul argues that the Corinthians are not like Israel (either past or present). Israel was incapable of correctly perceiving/reading Moses (due to the veil over their hearts) but the unveiled Corinthians perceive in themselves (i. e., “as in a mirror”) “the glory of the Lord.” Paul’s implicit point is that the Corinthians should thereby also be able to recognize “the glory of the Lord” in his ministry as well. Indeed, a few verses later (4:3-4), the apostle insists that those who are incapable of perceiving his gospel have had their thinking impeded by Satan, “the god of this age.”
In:
Moses in Corinth
Author:
Abstract
The final chapter presents a summary of previous findings. 2 Corinthians 3 was composed as part of Paul’s first apology to the Corinthians (2:14-7:4). In that apology, the apostle attempted to quell suspicions that arose from within the community in response to both 1 Corinthians and 2 Corinthians 8, suspicions regarding Paul’s collection for the Jerusalem church. Throughout the early part of the apology, Paul appeals to the figure of Moses. In 3:7-11, the apostle compares the glory of his own ministry to that of the lawgiver; he insists that more glory attends his διακονία. Furthermore, he labels the ministry of Moses a διακονία of death and condemnation because, I argue, it brought such to the gentiles. Paul then contrasts his behavior with that of the lawgiver, insisting that he, unlike Moses, has been entirely open with his constituency. He next introduces Israel and her obstructed perception to raise questions about the perceptual capability of the Corinthians. Was the Corinthians’ perception of Paul veiled like Israel’s perception of Moses? Paul concludes the section by setting Moses up as a paradigm for the gentile Corinthians. Just as Moses “turned to the Lord” and had his veil removed, so should the Corinthians—as a result of their conversion—be able to perceive with unveiled faces. They should be able to see the “glory of the Lord” in their own transformation and thereby, Paul implies, they should be able to view it in Paul’s διακονία as well.
In:
Moses in Corinth
Author:
In:
Moses in Corinth
Page:12