Community, Divine Service, and the Spirit,1 Corinthians

A Commentary onthe First Epistleto the Corinthiansby Hans ConzelmannTranslated byJames W. LeitchBibliography and References byJames W. DunklyEdited byGeorge W. MacRae, S.J.FortressPress PhiladelphiaTranslated from the German Der erste Brief an die Korinther by Hans Conzelmann (1st edition). Kritisch-Exegetischer Kommentar ber das Neue Testament begrundet von Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer, Fnfte Abteilung11. Auflage. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Gttingen, 1969. 1975 in the English translation by Fortress PressAll rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner.Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 73-88360ISBN 0-8006-6005-6[footnoteRef:1] [1: Conzelmann, H. (1975). 1 Corinthians : A commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians. Translation of Der erste Brief an die Korinther.; Includes indexes. Hermeneia--a critical and historical commentary on the Bible (i). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.]

Chapters 1214The Criterion12:13[footnoteRef:2]* [2: * 1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brothers and sisters, I do not want you to be uninformed. 2 You know that when you were pagans, you were enticed and led astray to idols that could not speak. 3 Therefore I want you to understand that no one speaking by the Spirit of God ever says Let Jesus be cursed! and no one can say Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit. 1 Corinthians 12:13 (NRSV)]

121Now concerning spiritual gifts,[footnoteRef:3]1 brothers, I would not have you ignorant. 2/You know that, while you were still paganshow you were drawn to dumb idols and carried away.[footnoteRef:4]2 3/Therefore I inform you that no one who speaks in the Spirit of God says: Jesus is accursed! and that no one can say: Jesus is Lord! except in the Holy Spirit. [3: 1 In itself, the translation spiritual people, men of the Spirit, is also possible, cf. 2:15*; 3:1*; 14:37*. Yet despite 14:37* the theme is not types of men but gifts.] [4: 2 If we read , then it is best (with Lietzmann) to take , how, as a repetition of , that (Heinrici: incorrect, but forceful). The interpretation of the clause as an intermediate clause is not so good: that, even as you were always drawn to dumb idols, you were carried away, taking the auxiliary with . : augmented tenses of the indicative with in an iterative sense is Hellenistic usage; Blass-Debrunner 367. Another possibility is to read (Weiss).]

1[footnoteRef:5]* The new topic,[footnoteRef:6]3 once again introduced in the style of an answer to questions (, concerning), embraces chaps. 1214. They provide a richer insight into community life than any other passage in the New Testament, and especially into the busy life of divine worship in Corinth. They confirm the picture that can be gathered from other parts of the epistle, the picture of the enthusiasm[footnoteRef:7]4 prevailing there, and they provide impressive evidence, on the other hand, of the thoroughgoing uniformity of the theological criticism of Paul, who here, too, practices his eschatological proviso (see above all on chap. 13), without yet making eschatology his explicit theme. [5: * 1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brothers and sisters, I do not want you to be uninformed. 1 Corinthians 12:1 (NRSV)] [6: 3 Literature: Bauer, s.vv. , .] [7: 4 This consists not in the emergence of ecstasy, but in the way it is pursued and turned into self-edification and freedom demonstrations.]

The precise content of the enquiry from Corinth is unknown to us.[footnoteRef:8]5 The genitive , spiritual, is to be taken in a neuter, not in a masculine sense (spiritual gifts, not spiritual people); this is clear from 14:1[footnoteRef:9]* and from the interchange with .[footnoteRef:10]6 Paul is in agreement with the Corinthians on the point that the ecstatic phenomena really are expressions of the Spirit. The designation of them as is not criticized,[footnoteRef:11]7 though it is certainly theologically transcended and thereby corrected. The Spirit is for him, too, a supernatural power that gives rise to un-normal effects. In the conception of the Spirit they are at one. The point at issue is the theological existence of believers, their concrete determination by the Spirit. Paul raises the discussion to the level of theology. With the acclamation of the , Lord, the objective event of salvation and the community are both taken into the criteria.[footnoteRef:12]8 With a powerful touch of style, in chiastically modified parallelism, Paul sets the possibility wrought by the Spirit, the possibility of calling upon the Lord, over against the Spirit-less impossibility: the Spirit (who of course is the Spirit of the Lord, 2 Cor 3:17[footnoteRef:13]*) cannot contradict himself. He cannot curse Jesus, [footnoteRef:14]9 , Jesus is accursed, is an ad hoc construction on Pauls part to form an antithesis to Jesus is Lord.[footnoteRef:15]10 [8: 5 Did it refer to the order of precedence among the phenomena, more particularly between speaking with tongues and prophecy? See on chap. 14.] [9: * 1 Pursue love and strive for the spiritual gifts, and especially that you may prophesy. 1 Corinthians 14:1 (NRSV)] [10: 6 Neuter: 9:11*; 15:46*.] [11: 7 On the contrary, it would have been from Paul that the Corinthians learned this designation for the ecstatic phenomena, as indeed it was presumably he, too, who kindled the whole pneumatism: 14:18*; 1 Thess 5:19f.*.] [12: 8 In keeping with this is the introduction in the sequel of the word , and of the aspect of , upbuilding (which in chap. 14 determines the scale of values), as also the fact that profane acts of service for the community are taken up into the gifts of the Spirit.] [13: * 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. 2 Corinthians 3:17 (NRSV)] [14: 9 (classical ), oblation, serves in the LXX to render , that which is delivered up to God, consecrated or accursed. In the negative sense, Num 21:3*, etc. The only extrabiblical example for this meaning is on an imprecation tablet from Megara (first-second century a.d.) where the word occurs twice with the meaning curse, in addition to the occurrence of on the reverse, at the end; Richard Wnsch, Antike Fluchtafeln, KIT, 20 (Bonn: Marcus & Weber, 21912), no. 1; Deissmann, Light, 95 [74].] [15: 10 Others assume that this curse was actually uttered:a) One thinks of Jewish cursing of the crucified (Schlatter, 333), which finds support in Deut 21:23* (Gal 3:13*); LXX has , Paul , Hebrew , cursed of God. The derivation from Deut 21:23* does not easily suggest itself, not even if an allusion to the passage is found in 4QpNah I, 7f. (Alexander Jannaeus is accused of being the first to have men hung alive on the tree, i.e. crucified, whereas the passage originally refers to the hanging up of the corpse of the executed criminal). Moreover, in view of the whole outlook of the epistle, a special reference to the Jews is improbable.b) Weiss and others believe there were instances in which Jesus was actually cursed in ecstasy. But it is hard to conceive this. And the alleged pagan parallels (the Sibyl oppressed by her inspiration; Cassandra cursing Apollo under the burden of her knowledge; Allo, Spicq, see on 16:22*) are no parallels. Fantastic, too, is Schmithais suggestion, Gnosticism in Corinth, 124130 [117122], that the Corinthian Gnostics curse the , flesh, of the earthly Jesus. There is no evidence for the widespread contention that there were Gnostics who cursed (the earthly) Jesus. The two passages in Origen which are adduced in its favor have a different meaning:Orig., Cels. 6.28, does not say that the Ophites utter curses against Jesus, but that they curse him in fact by equating him with the serpent. The same thing is said in the fragment from the lost Origen Commentary, Orig., Catena fragm. 47 in I Cor. xii.3 (in Claude Jenkins, Origen on I Corinthians IV, JThSt, o.s. 10 [190809]: 2951, here esp. 30): , . , , , There is a certain sect which does not admit a convert unless he pronounces anathemas on Jesus; and that sect is worthy of the name which it has chosen; for it is the sect of the so-called Ophites, who utter blasphemous words in praise of the serpent, which is accursed of God (Origen, Contra Celsum, tr. Chadwick, 344, n. 2). See Birger A. Pearson, Did the Gnostics Curse Jesus? JBL 86 (1967): 301305.The thesis in question is refuted by the fact that the Corinthians recognize without question the statement of the creed on the death and resurrection of Jesus (15:1ff.*). That Paul here says Jesus, not Christ, is due simply to the constructing of an antithesis to . The antithesis is not between and , but between and . Lhrmann, Offenbarungsverstndnis, 29, rightly says: those who assume that Jesus was really cursed in Corinth leave vv 4ff.* out of account. Paul presupposes that they have really received the Spirit and accordingly cannot speak thus ( ).]

2[footnoteRef:16]* The criticism is prepared for by a retrospective glance at the erstwhile participation of the addressees in the pagan cult.[footnoteRef:17]11 They are here roundly treated as Gentile Christians, which is in keeping with the composition of the community. The exact sense of the allusion is disputed: the wording and the construction are unclear (see note 2 above). Is () , you were drawn and carried away, an allusion to the ecstatic character of pagan cults?[footnoteRef:18]12 The significance of the words () and allows of no certain conclusion. The phrase certainly implies that they were not their own masters; but this can just as well mean being dominated in a general way by demons, the actors in the pagan cult (see 8:16[footnoteRef:19]*; 10:20[footnoteRef:20]*), as being swept into ecstasy.[footnoteRef:21]13 Against the interpretation in terms of pagan ecstasy it is often said that the qualification of the idols[footnoteRef:22]14 as dumb is not in keeping with this.[footnoteRef:23]15 But the word is simply a traditional attribute in Jewish polemic against images[footnoteRef:24]16 and merely points to the fact that the pagan cult is vain, and indeed surrenders its devotees to the power of the demons, but not that it is carried on quietly.[footnoteRef:25]17 The decisive thing for exegesis is the fact that here the intention is not to emphasize a distinction from paganism, but an analogy; you know of course from your own experience how a man has no will of his own when he is in the power of a . Thus the whole question is concerned only with ecstatics, not with men in a normal condition (Weiss). [16: * 2 You know that when you were pagans, you were enticed and led astray to idols that could not speak. 1 Corinthians 12:2 (NRSV)] [17: 11 This is a variation of the schema oncebut now; see 6:11*.] [18: 12 Illustrative material is provided by the Dionysus cult among others. Further, Ps.-Luc., Syr. Dea. See Nilsson, Geschichte, vol. 2, index, s.vv. Ekstase, Ekstatische Strmung, , Origen, etc. Strabo, Geog. 10.3.616 (C466-471).] [19: * 1 Now concerning food sacrificed to idols: we know that all of us possess knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. 2 Anyone who claims to know something does not yet have the necessary knowledge; 3 but anyone who loves God is known by him. 4 Hence, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that no idol in the world really exists, and that there is no God but one. 5 Indeed, even though there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earthas in fact there are many gods and many lords 6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist. 1 Corinthians 8:16 (NRSV)] [20: * 20 No, I imply that what pagans sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God. I do not want you to be partners with demons. 1 Corinthians 10:20 (NRSV)] [21: 13 Athenag., Suppl. 26: , It is, then, these demons we have been talking about that draw men to idols (LCC 1:329). For phenomena accompanying prophetic ecstasy see Athenag.., loc. cit.; Luc., Jup. trag. 30; Liv., Urb. cond. 39.13.12; Tert., Nat. 2.7.] [22: 14 : for the Greek view of the nature of images of the gods cf. Nilsson, Geschichte 2:502505. In Greek these were not called , but . is not the image as representing the god, but as being only his image. In addition to this, designates the shadowy existence of the dead (Soph., Ai. 126); Nilsson, Geschichte 1:195f.; Friedrich Bchsel, TDNT 2:375f.. When Judaism uses the word to designate images of the gods, it indicates their unreality. The LXX uses it to translate both the words for images ( , ,, etc.) and for gods (, etc.) and also for the abominableness of image-worship ( ,, etc.). For instances of the rare Greek use of for images of the gods (in addition to Polyb., Hist. 30.25.1315) see Bauer, s.v.] [23: 15 Dupont, Gnosis, 149, n. 2: , be carried away, is not the same as , be caught up, in 2 Cor 12:2*, 4*. For details see Karl Maly, 1 Kor 12, 13, eine Regei zur Unterscheidung der Geister? BZ, n.s. 10 (1966): 8295: You know that again and again you were brought to dumb idols, haled off (like prisoners). The accent, Maly argues, lies on their being enslaved under the dumb idols, cf. Deut 28:36*: , , , The Lord will bring you and your rulers into a nation which neither you nor your fathers have known, and there you will worship other gods, gods of wood and stone [Trans.]. But this passage is not decisive for the sense of . Maly goes on to argue that Paul avoids a direct antithesis between , be driven to idols, and , be driven by the Spirit, with an eye to Corinth, in order that should not be understood as constraint. His contrast, according to Maly, is: once enslaved to dumb idols, now enabled to speak in the Spirit. in v 4*, he argues, goes a step further: the activity of the Spirit is not exhausted in the spoken word. But such an exposition shifts the accents of the text. It is surely not the participants in the pagan cult who are dumb!] [24: 16 Hab 2:18*; Ps 113:15*; 3 Macc. 4.16*.] [25: 17 Lietzmann, too, finds the attribute dumb to be out of place here. Not at all!]

In view of chap. 15 we have to comment that if Paul is addressing the Corinthians as erstwhile mystes, then he believes them capable of mystery thinking even now. This does not mean that they have a hope of life after death. The mysteries communicate vital powers for this life; they confer protection from sickness, from the blows of fate. A hope for the beyond, however, must not be linked with them.[footnoteRef:26]18 [26: 18 Josef Kroll, Gott und Hlle. Studien der Bibliothek Warburg, 20 (Leipzig and Berlin: Teubner, 1932), 500f.. Isis cult: Apul., Met. 11.6; Ditt., Syll. 3:113119 (no. 985; for conditions of admission to the mysteries, see Otto Weinreich Stiftung und Kultsatzungeneines Privatheiligtums in Philadelphia in Lydien, SAH, 1919, 16 [Heidelberg: Winter, 1919]); see also on 15:12*. The silence of most of the grave inscriptions is characteristic; cf. Werner Peek, Griechische Grabgedichte, Schriftcn und Quellen der alten Welt, 7 (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1960), 178 (priestess of Dionysus, from Miletus, thirdsecond century b.c.).]

3[footnoteRef:27]* It follows from v 2* that ecstasy alone is no criterion for the working of the Spirit, but itself requires such a criterion.[footnoteRef:28]19 This is supplied by the acclamation,[footnoteRef:29]20 which is for its part an effect of the Spirit.[footnoteRef:30]21 This acclamation has an established function in the cult; it is constitutive of it.[footnoteRef:31]22 Thus Paul is not calling upon his own subjective experience as an ecstatic,[footnoteRef:32]23 and is not discussing the phenomena as such. [27: * 3 Therefore I want you to understand that no one speaking by the Spirit of God ever says Let Jesus be cursed! and no one can say Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit. 1 Corinthians 12:3 (NRSV)] [28: 19 For a history of the exegesis of v 3* see Guy de Broglie, Le texte fondamentale tale de saint Paul contre la foi naturelle (I Cor., XII, 3), RechSR 39 (1951): 253266.] [29: 20 The confession of Rom 10:9*.] [30: 21 Like prayer, so also the acclamation is not a possibility proper to man. But in contradistinction to Gnosticism and normal ecstasy, the subject is not extinguished by the Spirita point which Paul brings out in chap. 14.] [31: 22 Christians are those who call upon the name of the Lord, 1:2*. is not constructed by analogy to . It is true that the Emperor was designated Lord already in the first century; but is not a cultic acclamation (cf. its absence in the trials of Christians, Werner Foerster, TDNT 3:1057f.), and in the milieu in which the Christian acclamation originated, emperor worship played no part.] [32: 23 Cf. 2 Cor 12:1ff.*.]

The Multiplicity and Unity of Spiritual Gifts1 Corinthians 12:431[footnoteRef:33]* [33: * 4 Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; 5 and there are varieties of services, but the same Lord; 6 and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who activates all of them in everyone. 7 To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. 8 To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the discernment of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 11 All these are activated by one and the same Spirit, who allots to each one individually just as the Spirit chooses. 12 For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. 13 For in the one Spirit we were all baptized into one bodyJews or Greeks, slaves or freeand we were all made to drink of one Spirit. 14 Indeed, the body does not consist of one member but of many. 15 If the foot would say, Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body, that would not make it any less a part of the body. 16 And if the ear would say, Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body, that would not make it any less a part of the body. 17 If the whole body were an eye, where would the hearing be? If the whole body were hearing, where would the sense of smell be? 18 But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. 19 If all were a single member, where would the body be? (Only first 15 verses of range shown)1 Corinthians 12:431 (NRSV)]

124There are assignments (or: varieties[footnoteRef:34]1) of (the gifts of) grace, but (it is) the same Spirit. 5/And there are assignments of acts of service, but the same Lord. 6/And there are assignments of operations, but the same God who works all in all (or: them all in all men). 7/But each is given the manifestation of the Spirit in order to make use of it. 8/For to one it is given through the Spirit to speak with wisdom, to another to speak with knowledge, according to[footnoteRef:35]2 the same Spirit, 9/another[footnoteRef:36]3 is given faith, in the same Spirit, another gifts of healing, in the one Spirit, 10/another the working of miracles, another prophecy, another the distinguishing of spirits, another (various) kinds of (speaking with) tongues, another the interpreting of tongues. 11/ But all this is the work of one and the same Spirit, who assigns to each in particular whatever he pleases. [34: 1 See the commentary.] [35: 2 Bauer, s.v. II 5 a .] [36: 3 In vv 9* and 10* the Western text has asyndeton throughout (declared original by Zuntz, Text, 105107, who says it is partly preserved also by the Alexandrians).]

12For as the body is one, but has many members, and yet all the members of the body, although they are many, are one body, so also is Christ. 13/For indeed in one Spirit we were all baptised into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, slaves or free men,[footnoteRef:37]1 and we were all imbued with one Spirit. 14/For indeed[footnoteRef:38]2 the body is not one member but many. 15/If the foot were to say: Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body, yet it does belong to the body all the same.[footnoteRef:39]3 16/And if the ear should say: Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body, yet it does belong to the body all the same. 17/If the whole body were an eye,[footnoteRef:40]4 where would the hearing be? If it were all hearing, where would the sense of smell be? 18/As it is, however, God has appointed the members in the body, each single one of them, as it has pleased him. 19/If they were all one member, where would the body be? 20/As it is, however, there are many members, but one body. 21/The eye cannot say to the hand: I do not need you, nor again the head to the feet: I do not need you, 22/but the very members of the body which are considered specially weak are all the more necessary.[footnoteRef:41]5 23/And those parts of the body which we regard as specially dishonorable we treat with special honor, and our unseemly parts have (or: receive) special seemliness; 24/whereas our seemly parts have no need of this. But God has fitted the body together in such a way that he has given special honor to the member that is in need,[footnoteRef:42]6 25/in order that there should be no division in the body, but that the members should harmoniously provide for each other, 26/And when one member suffers, all the members suffer with it; when one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it. 27/But you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. 28/And God has appointed some in the church to be first of all apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, acts of helping, acts of administration, various kinds of (speaking with) tongues. 29/Are all apostles? All prophets? All teachers? (Do) all (work) miracles? 30/Do all hava gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret them? [37: 1 Such fourfold series are found in Hellenistic prose: Ditt., Or. 1:602f. (no. 383, lines 172, 194: ); Heinrich Drrie, Der Knigskult des Antiochos von Kommagene im Lichte neuer InschriftenFunde, AAG, 3, 60 (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1964), 152.] [38: 2 : Blass-Debrunner 452(3); goes with the whole sentence.] [39: 3 That is no reason why it should not. : Blass-Debrunner 236(5); : Bauer, s.v. 4 a .] [40: 4 Unreal condition, cf. v 19*.] [41: 5 : for the word order (preceding the subject) cf. Rom 8:18*; Blass-Debrunner 474(5a).] [42: 6 Variant reading , that is inferior: p46 D G A.]

But strive for the higher gifts! 31/I will show you a stillmore excellent way.46[footnoteRef:43]* These verses form a unity in style and content. Three sentences are constructed in parallel, and provided with a heavily accented conclusion. There is an underlying triadic formula: GodLordSpirit. Such triads are frequently found in the New Testament. The order of sequence is still free;[footnoteRef:44]4 it is adapted to the context. Here Paul links up with the term , spiritual gifts, and builds up a climax.[footnoteRef:45]5 The ascription of the three concepts , , , gifts of grace, acts of service, operations, to the Spirit, the Lord, and God is presumably not to be regarded as merely an arbitrary matter of rhetoric,[footnoteRef:46]6 but also as being determined by the content.[footnoteRef:47]7 is an equivalent for and is ascribed as such to the Spirit. intentionally goes together with , Lord (cf. 3:5[footnoteRef:48]*). And finally, the linking of and , God, is shown by the extended conclusion of the third sentence to be appropriate. We have here a formula of omnipotence, which is now related to the community (and thereby Christianized).[footnoteRef:49]8 [43: * 4 Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; 5 and there are varieties of services, but the same Lord; 6 and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who activates all of them in everyone. 1 Corinthians 12:46 (NRSV)] [44: 4 2 Cor 13:13*; Eph 4:46*; 1 Pet 1:2*. It is not yet possible to speak of a Trinity, not even in view of Mt 28:19*. The Spirit is not a Person. Weiss observes: The threefold character of the sentences is not the cause but the effect of the triadic formula (II 13:13).] [45: 5 For the movement of a series toward God as its goal see 3:23*.] [46: 6 Thus Lietzmann. This is not to rule out of the question that there is also a rhetorical play, here with the ending so much favored in Hellenism; see Blass-Debrunner 488(3). (Weiss finds the order a b a.)] [47: 7 Heinrici; Ingo Hermann, Kyrios und Pneuma, SANT, 2 (Munich: Ksel, 1961), 7176.] [48: * 5 What then is Apollos? What is Paul? Servants through whom you came to believe, as the Lord assigned to each. 1 Corinthians 3:5 (NRSV)] [49: 8 Cf. Eph 1:11*. is essentially neuter; it can be asked, however, whether Paul does not understand it as masculine.]

can mean assignment or distinction. The second meaning is suggested by Rom 12:6[footnoteRef:50]* (in a parallel context). But here v 11[footnoteRef:51]* tells in favor of the former rendering.[footnoteRef:52]9 , gift of grace, takes the place of , grace, in Paul when the differentiation is expressed, namely, the assignment in the form of individual gifts to individual men.[footnoteRef:53]10 The word is suited from the very start to be an equivalent of , since of course also has in Hellenistic Greek the sense of a supernatural power or force, and is thus akin to .[footnoteRef:54]11 Nevertheless the choice of words will be partially determined by the specifically Pauline thought of grace, and will thus include a critical component: it is through grace that the pneumatic is what he is. Not he, but the gift, is the object of theology (2:12[footnoteRef:55]*). , service,[footnoteRef:56]12 is essentially a profane concept.[footnoteRef:57]13 The word must be allowed to keep the general character of its significance.[footnoteRef:58]14 The essential point is precisely that everyday acts of service are now set on a par with the recognized, supernatural phenomena of the Spirit.[footnoteRef:59]15 Thus Paul is no longer oriented to the phenomena, but to the community as the goal of the Spirits working. He is showing the believer who has no ecstatic gifts that he is assigned his part, and how he is assigned it. For the believer in question, grace is thereby made the key to his understanding of himself and his attitude toward his brothers. [50: * 6 We have gifts that differ according to the grace given to us: prophecy, in proportion to faith; Romans 12:6 (NRSV)] [51: * 11 All these are activated by one and the same Spirit, who allots to each one individually just as the Spirit chooses. 1 Corinthians 12:11 (NRSV)] [52: 9 , who assigns to each as he pleases. The seeming contradiction that in vv 46* the gifts are distributed in a trinitarian fashion, whereas in v 11* the one Spirit brings about all the operations, is in actual fact no contradiction. Verses 46*, too, have in view the unity of the originator and mediator of the gifts. The Spirit is nothing other than the manifestation of the Lord, who for his part is the salvation of God. , assignment, distribution, contains an allusion both to the imparting and to the individualizing; cf. the parallel in Rom 12:6*; Bultmann, Theology 1:325 [326]. It is presupposed that every believer has a gift, his own particular one. This is clear from the mention of the Lord and of God alongside the Spirit: by the Lord salvation is bestowed on allby the God who works all things and bestows upon all. Once again a critical sense becomes perceptible: pneumatics are not (any longer) specially marked out individuals. The Corinthian individualism is destroyed.] [53: 10 can, however, also be synonymous with : the event of salvation, 2 Cor 1:11*; Rom 5:15*; 6:23*. Here and in v 7*, manifestation of the Spirit, are essentially the same (Lhrmann, Offenbarungsverstndnis, 27f.).] [54: 11 Wetter, Charis, 168187.] [55: * 12 Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit that is from God, so that we may understand the gifts bestowed on us by God. 1 Corinthians 2:12 (NRSV)] [56: 12 See on 16:15*; 2 Cor 5:18f.*; 11:8*; 4:1*; 6:3f.*; Rom 11:13*.] [57: 13 is used first and foremost of service at table. Plato uses it in a positive sense of the civil service. In the LXX the word group is of no significance. Josephus uses it also of priestly service; but this is rare. In the NT cf. Mt 25:4244*; Lk 22:26*. Paul describes the collection as , 2 Cor 8:4f.*.] [58: 14 It must not be taken as applying to a definite office; cf. on v 28*. Eduard Schweizer, Church Order in the New Testament, tr. Frank Clarke, SBT, 1, 32 (London: SCM, 1961), 173176 (Gemeinde und Gemeindeordnung im Neuen Testament, AThANT, 35 [Zurich: Zwingli, 21962], 157159).] [59: 15 J. Brosch, Charismen und mter in der Urkirche (Bonn: Hanstein, 1951), 25, argues in vain against the fact that for Paul everything done for the community is a .]

, operations: cf. Gal 2:8[footnoteRef:60]*; Phil 2:13[footnoteRef:61]*; see on vv 910[footnoteRef:62]* (synonymous with ). [60: * 8 (for he who worked through Peter making him an apostle to the circumcised also worked through me in sending me to the Gentiles), Galatians 2:8 (NRSV)] [61: * 13 for it is God who is at work in you, enabling you both to will and to work for his good pleasure. Philippians 2:13 (NRSV)] [62: * 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the discernment of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 1 Corinthians 12:910 (NRSV)]

7[footnoteRef:63]* Verse 7* can be regarded as summing up vv 46* (Robertson and Plummer) or as providing the heading for vv 810[footnoteRef:64]* (Weiss). The difference is only one of emphasis. In the former case, v 7* plainly shows that the triadic differentiation is meant as a pointer to the origin and nature of the gifts, not as a schematic division into three different sources of origin: here the Spirit is again the sole Giver of all the gifts. In the second case, a twofold standpoint is maintained: unity in differentiation.[footnoteRef:65]16 The emphasis is not on , each,[footnoteRef:66]17 but on , (in order to make use of it (literally, with a view to what is for the best), that is, on the aspect of , upbuilding.[footnoteRef:67]18 The genitive can be understood as subjective ([footnoteRef:68]Heinrici, despite 2 Cor 4:2[footnoteRef:69]*: , manifestation of the truth) or as objective (Robertson and Plummer), that is to say (a) the manifestation given by the Spirit, or (b) the Spirit given by the manifestation. [63: * 7 To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. 1 Corinthians 12:7 (NRSV)] [64: * 8 To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the discernment of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 1 Corinthians 12:810 (NRSV)] [65: 16 Since the unity arises not from the phenomenon nor from the act of the individual, but from the gift character.] [66: 17 Although it is in fact, presupposed that each Christian has his gift, cf. v 11*; Rom 12:3ff.*.] [67: 18 See on 6:12*; 10:23*; we have thus to understand , for the church; cf. the sense of the upbuilding in vv 12ff.* and chap. 14. Weiss thinks that is at least equally stressed, that we have a shortened form of expression, and that lacks the nuance, one thing to one, another to another. Yet the starting point is in the first instance not the process of distribution, but the act of bestowing the gift. There is no thought of the Greek motif: , the gods do not give all things to all men.] [68: Heinrici C. F. G. Heinrici, Der erste Brief an die Korinther, KEK, 5 (Gttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 81896).] [69: * 2 We have renounced the shameful things that one hides; we refuse to practice cunning or to falsify Gods word; but by the open statement of the truth we commend ourselves to the conscience of everyone in the sight of God. 2 Corinthians 4:2 (NRSV)]

810* The enumeration in vv 810* is unsystematic. A certain grouping can nevertheless be discerned: (a) v 8[footnoteRef:70]*; (b) vv 910a*; (c) v 10b[footnoteRef:71]*;[footnoteRef:72]19 cf. the articulation by means of , to oneto another. [70: * 8 To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, 1 Corinthians 12:8 (NRSV)] [71: * 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the discernment of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 1 Corinthians 12:10 (NRSV)] [72: 19 Blass-Debrunner 306. Robertson and Plummer are too schematic in declaring (on the basis of their view of v 7*) that vv 810* explain while vv 12ff.* explain .]

The Spirit appears on the one hand as cause ( , through the Spirit),[footnoteRef:73]20 and partly as norm ( , according to the same Spirit),[footnoteRef:74]21 without it being possible to take the distinction strictly.[footnoteRef:75]22 The articulation , to oneto another, seems to suggest that a distinction is to be sought between , speaking with (literally, the word of) wisdom,[footnoteRef:76]23 and , the word of knowledge. Yet this is in contradiction to the usage throughout the epistle.[footnoteRef:77]24 Both mean the gift of speaking instructively (revealingly, 14:24f.[footnoteRef:78]*).[footnoteRef:79]25 is here a special gift alongside others, and accordingly not faith, but apparently the ability to perform miracles,[footnoteRef:80]26 and thus akin to the [footnoteRef:81]27 ,[footnoteRef:82]28 gifts of healing. The change from , in the same, to , in the one, is merely rhetorical. [73: 20 Despite the personified form of expression the Spirit is not considered to be a person.] [74: 21 Bachmann. Lietzmann holds the two prepositions to be synonymous.] [75: 22 Bauer, s.v. II 5 a : because of, as a result of, on the basis of. , by revelation, Gal 2:2*.] [76: 23 Ben Edwin Perry, Aesopica, vol. 1 (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1952), 213, line 1: , Fortune has given him a word of wisdom [= has given him to speak with wisdom].] [77: 24 See 1:5*; 1:21*; 2:3*; 14:6*; Col 2:3*. Against the assertion that in Paul is less than cf. 8:1 ff.*; 13:2*. Bultmann, TDNT 1:708, n. 73. Weiss is wrongly schematic in contending that denotes the content of prophecy and a is one like 15:23ff.*, 50ff.*, whereas points in the direction of , teaching: 6:5*. Rather, 2:6ff.* is an example of speaking with wisdom.] [78: * 24 But if all prophesy, an unbeliever or outsider who enters is reproved by all and called to account by all. 25 After the secrets of the unbelievers heart are disclosed, that person will bow down before God and worship him, declaring, God is really among you. 1 Corinthians 14:2425 (NRSV)] [79: 25 The gift which they find to be wanting in Paul, according to 2 Cor 10:10* (cf. also 11:6*). That is to say, they deny that he is a genuine pneumatic.] [80: 26 13:2*; Bultmann, TDNT 6:206.] [81: 27 The evidence for the singular is poor.] [82: 28 Healing miracles in the ancient world: Epidaurus in particular is well known. Sources: Gerhard Delling, Antike Wundertexte. KIT, 79 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 21960). Albrecht Oepke, TDNT 3:205213.]

, working of miracles, is also a related concept: are miracles. Instead of we have the general term , recalling v 6[footnoteRef:83]*; as indeed , too, is more general than , gifts of healing.[footnoteRef:84]29 The nature of , prophecy, is made plain by chap. 14; , the distinguishing of spirits, is explained by 14:24f.*; speaking with tongues (and translating of tongues) is again defined by chap. 14. It is presumably no accident that this gift is mentioned last: it is the one that is most highly valued in Corinth, precisely because it is unintelligible. It is apparently regarded as having command of the language of heaven (cf. 13:1[footnoteRef:85]*). Paul indicates his criticism by the very order of enumeration.[footnoteRef:86]30 [83: * 6 and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who activates all of them in everyone. 1 Corinthians 12:6 (NRSV)] [84: 29 Or is Paul thinking specially of exorcisms, which of course are consciously distinguished from healings of the sick, not only in the Synoptics (indirectly also in John, where no exorcisms are recounted; nor in Epidaurus either)? / in the OT and NT almost always denote the working of divine (or demonic) powers; see Georg Bertram, TDNT 2:652654.] [85: * 1 If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 1 Corinthians 13:1 (NRSV)] [86: 30 Lietzmann speaks of angels tongues. The expression is an unhappy one. If the speaker with tongues speaks the language of heaven, then the angels speak natural language.]

11* This takes up vv 67[footnoteRef:87]* and rounds off the section. , each, is emphatically stressed. , as he pleases, underlines that the gift has the character of free grace. This denies to the pneumatic any power of his own. By placing the accent on one Spirit, Paul prepares the way for the theme of the next section: one body.[footnoteRef:88]31 This association of ideas makes it plain that Pauls understanding of the Spirit has its roots in the bond between the Spirit and the community. [87: * 6 and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who activates all of them in everyone. 7 To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. 1 Corinthians 12:67 (NRSV)] [88: 31 Hermann, Kyrios und Pneuma, 7685, observes that the foundation is the unity of Christ and Pneuma, which is presupposed in the whole section.]

This section is dominated by the figure of the body as an organism. This was to begin with a popular figure;[footnoteRef:89]7 it was then taken over by philosophy, especially by the Stoa.[footnoteRef:90]8 [89: 7 The best known form is that of the fable of Menenius Agrippa in Liv., Urb. cond. 2.32, and Dion. Hal., Ant. Rom. 6.86. The figure is also used elsewhere of political relationships: according to Quint. Curt. Ruf., Hist. Alex. 10.6.8; 10.9.2, the kingdom is the body, the ruler the head, the provinces the members. Jos., Bell. 4.406. W. Nestle, Die Fabel des Menenius Agrippa, Klio 21 (1927): 350360.] [90: 8 Here, too, the figure is related to politics: Cic. Off. 3.5.22; Sen., Ir. 2.31.7; it is connected with the notion of , sympathy, in M. Aur. Ant., Medit. 5.26 (see on v 26*). In a properly philosophical sense, of the unity of men and gods, Epict., Diss. 2.5.24f.; 2.10.3f.; 2.23f.; Sen., Ep. 95.52: omne hoc, quod vides, quo divina atque humana conclusa sunt, unum est: membra sumus corporis magni. natura nos cognatos edidit, cum ex isdem et in eadem gigneret. haec nobis amorem indidit mutuum et sociables fecit, All that you behold, that which comprises both God and man, is onewe are the parts of one great body. Nature produced us related to one another, since she created us from the same source and to the same end. She engendered in us mutual affection, and made us prone to friendships (Loeb 3:91). M. Aur. Ant., Medit. 2.1; 7.13: , . , , . , , The principle which obtains in single organisms with regard to the limbs of the body applies also in separate beings to rational things constituted to work in conjunction. But the perception of this will come home to you better, if you often say to yourself, I am a limb [] of the organized body of rational things. But if, using the letter , you say that you are a part [], you do not yet love mankind from the heart (cf. Loeb, 169). Epict., Diss. 2.10.3f.: . , , , , you are a citizen of the world, and a part of it. To treat nothing as a matter of private profit, but to act like the foot or the hand, which, if they had the faculty of reason and understood the constitution of nature, would never exercise choice or desire in any other way but by reference to the whole (Loeb 1:275). In Christian usage: 1 Cl. 37.5.]

To be sure, opinions are divided as to whether Paul is employing the figure purely as such, or whether he is influenced by the proper sense of the term body of Christ (=church). The second interpretation seems to be indicated by the break between vv 12a[footnoteRef:91]* and 12b*:[footnoteRef:92]9 here the figure of one body seems to be replaced by the thing itself, the body of Christ.[footnoteRef:93]10 On the other hand it must be asked how far the expression can be pressed: is it not simply a case of a shortened form of expression?[footnoteRef:94]11 [91: * 12 For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ. 1 Corinthians 12:12 (NRSV)] [92: 9 Lietzmann says: For Paul, however, this is not merely a simile, but a mystical truth. Hence the sudden transition of thought in 12bff.*. The mere continuation of the simile would have to be: So, too, the different parts of the community form a unified bodyonly after this could there come the mystical statement: in fact, the body of Christ. Instead of this, Paul says briefly, so it is also with Christ, and then provides in the first instance an argument for the factuality of the mystic idea: v 13*.] [93: 10 We must not, however, combine this passage with 11:2ff.* and so read into it that Christ is at once both the head and the whole of the body. It is not until Col and Eph that this idea prevails. In 1 Cor there is only the body of Christ = the church.] [94: 11 Weiss, and Heinrich Schlier, Christus und die Kirche, 40f., contend that we have here only figurative language, , they say, means: So it is also, where Christ is.]

The basis of recent discussion is provided by E. Ksemanns thesis,[footnoteRef:95]11a that the real thought of the section is that of the church as the body of Christ. The thought of an organism, he argues, is merely an auxiliary idea. [95: 11a Ksemann, Leib, 159.]

13[footnoteRef:96]* Verse 13*[footnoteRef:97]12 does in fact point in the direction of the assumption that we have here not merely a figure, but a proper usage. This, to be sure, is not yet conclusively implied by the expression that we are baptized , into one body.[footnoteRef:98]13 But the thought and the sequence of thought certainly do point in this direction.[footnoteRef:99]14 For here Paul speaks only of the unity which is brought about by the abrogation of the (physical and social) differences between believers. This idea is not derivable from the figure of an organism. For the latter is designed to emphasize the belonging together of different elements.[footnoteRef:100]15 Thus the disturbance in the sequence of thought is an indication in favor of the interpretation that the body of Christ is preexistent in relation to the parts.[footnoteRef:101]16 Incorporation into it takes place through baptism.[footnoteRef:102]17 The latter brings about the eschatological[footnoteRef:103]18 abrogation of human differences:[footnoteRef:104]19 in Christ they no longer existthat is to say, in his body, in the church.[footnoteRef:105]20 [96: * 13 For in the one Spirit we were all baptized into one bodyJews or Greeks, slaves or freeand we were all made to drink of one Spirit. 1 Corinthians 12:13 (NRSV)] [97: 12 According to Weiss a fourline verse with the form a b b a; between a and a there is a rhymelike sound, between b and b anaphora.] [98: 13 The expression appears to mean that the body is already there when believers are taken up into it by baptism; this is in harmony with the prevailing conception of space. Not so Franz Mussner, Christus, das All und die Kirche im Epheserbrief, Trierer Theologische Studien, 5 (Trier: Paulinus, 1955), 125277, who holds that the expression has not a local, but a final or consecutive sense: baptism brings about the fellowship. Cerfaux, Church, 270277 [207211], would understand the expression in keeping with other combinations of with : Baptism is in one Spirit, and it consecrates us to one and the same body, the body of Christ with which it identifies us in a mystical way. Mystical!] [99: 14 According to Lietzmann, ., whether Jews, etc., disturbingly interrupts the course of the argument. For of course, so he says, the goal of the argument is unity; he finds the passage to be in its proper place in Gal 3:27f.*; Col 3:11*. This is to misunderstand the intention of the passage.] [100: 15 Ksemann, Leib, 159ff., says that after vv 4ff.* we expect that the body of Christ is the unity of the charismata, but that suddenly it is the Christians who constitute the body. This is surprising only when we have first raised the charismata to the dignity of hypostases.] [101: 16 That is, the church does not come into existence through the decision and association of men, but first makes this possible.] [102: 17 Cf. 10:1ff.*. Is , we were imbued with (literally were given to drink of), an allusion to the Lords Supper?] [103: 18 And not empirical.] [104: 19 Gal 3:28*; 1 Cor 7:1ff.*.] [105: 20 The realistic interpretation is confirmed by v 27* and Rom 12:4f.*.]

14[footnoteRef:106]* From v 14* on, to be sure, it is the figure of the body that dominates. From the standpoint of content, this means that now the accent again lies (as in vv 411[footnoteRef:107]*) upon the notion of differentiation.[footnoteRef:108]21 Lietzmann aptly remarks that the exposition of the figure is (as usually in Paul) not a happy one, because in contrast to Livy and Menenius Agrippa, there is no reason for the dissatisfaction of the parts.[footnoteRef:109]22 [106: * 14 Indeed, the body does not consist of one member but of many. 1 Corinthians 12:14 (NRSV)] [107: * 4 Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; 5 and there are varieties of services, but the same Lord; 6 and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who activates all of them in everyone. 7 To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. 8 To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, 9 to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, 10 to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the discernment of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. 11 All these are activated by one and the same Spirit, who allots to each one individually just as the Spirit chooses. 1 Corinthians 12:411 (NRSV)] [108: 21 : Johannes Horst, TDNT 4:555568.] [109: 22 In Menenius Agrippa the indignation is directed against the stomach, which appears not to work, but only to enjoy. Lietzmann goes on: And their conclusion that they do not belong to the body is rather strange. Here the application does in fact intrude into the figure. But the psychological explanation given by Lietzmann can hardly be right: in Corinth, he says, it was thought that every believer must possess all the charismata, and speaking with tongues had been made the criterion of a mans being a Christian, so that people were afraid they did not belong to the church if they did not possess the gift of tongues. This is not in the text. Rather, it must be maintained that the point is all along directed against fanatical isolation, in chap. 12 as much as in chap. 11.]

1516[footnoteRef:110]* Weiss thinks the point of vv 15f.* is aimed in the first instance not against the pride of privileged members, but against the all too humble self-assessment of inferior ones. Verses 2125[footnoteRef:111]*, he holds, are then directed against the privileged members. Now it is plain that in Corinth there are strong people who exalt themselves over the weak, and presumably also feelings of inferiority on the part of the nonpneumatics. But the figure[footnoteRef:112]23 surely suggests rather that Pauls attack is directed against the practice of individuals dissociating themselves from the body, that is, against enthusiastic individualism.[footnoteRef:113]24 [110: * 15 If the foot would say, Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body, that would not make it any less a part of the body. 16 And if the ear would say, Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body, that would not make it any less a part of the body. 1 Corinthians 12:1516 (NRSV)] [111: * 21 The eye cannot say to the hand, I have no need of you, nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. 22 On the contrary, the members of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, 23 and those members of the body that we think less honorable we clothe with greater honor, and our less respectable members are treated with greater respect; 24 whereas our more respectable members do not need this. But God has so arranged the body, giving the greater honor to the inferior member, 25 that there may be no dissension within the body, but the members may have the same care for one another. 1 Corinthians 12:2125 (NRSV)] [112: 23 Foot and hand: Epictet., Diss. 2.10.4, etc. Ear and eye: anaphora and antistrophe, and indeed even assonance [ ] (Weiss).] [113: 24 Contrary to Weiss, the polemic is not directed against the circumstance of one members considering himself to be the whole and being regarded by others as such. This cannot be deduced from v 20*. On see Weiss: owing to this circumstance, i.e., this circumstance is no reason for his not belonging to the body. The negation is doubled, because (repeating ) is an inseparable expression. Philo, Gig. 9: , , Yet the fact that our powers of vision are incapable of any perception of the forms of these souls is no reason why we should doubt that there are souls in the air (Loeb 2:449, 451). 2 Thess 3:9*; Theophil., Ad Autol. 1.2: , Just because the blind do not see, however, the light of the sun does not fail to shine (Grant, 35).]

17[footnoteRef:114]* Weiss says: Only as an appendage to the second illustration comes the reflection on how imperfect the organism would be if it all consisted of only one organ.[footnoteRef:115]25 and can designate not only sense perception, hearing and smelling, but also the organs, ear and nose.[footnoteRef:116]26 [114: * 17 If the whole body were an eye, where would the hearing be? If the whole body were hearing, where would the sense of smell be? 1 Corinthians 12:17 (NRSV)] [115: 25 Lietzmann observes: It [the figure] becomes clear only in v 17*, where the butt of the attack is the pneumatics who refused to subordinate themselves to the interests of the congregation. But the figure as such is no better constructed in v 17* than in vv 15f.*; clearer, however, is the bias against pneumatic emancipation.] [116: 26 See Bauer, s.vv. Cf. the expression , bring to the ears, in Acts 17:20*; cf. Soph., Ai. 149; Heb 5:11*; 2 Tim 4:3* (cf. v 4*); Lk 7:1*. occurs with in M. Aur. Ant., Medit. 10.35; Diog. L., Vit. 6.39: , , .]

18[footnoteRef:117]* In v 18* the exposition of the figure is interrupted. The latter would now call for a reference to the appropriateness of the structure of the body and to the necessity of cooperation. Instead of this, Paul points to the will of God (cf. 15:38[footnoteRef:118]*). The figure has for him no importance on its own account. [117: * 18 But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. 1 Corinthians 12:18 (NRSV)] [118: * 38 But God gives it a body as he has chosen, and to each kind of seed its own body. 1 Corinthians 15:38 (NRSV)]

1920[footnoteRef:119]* Remarkable, too, are vv 1920*:[footnoteRef:120]27 In v 19[footnoteRef:121]* the accent again lies on the differentiation; this accent is secured by interchanging , member, and , body. The rhetorical question, ; Where would the body be? is explained by Weiss as meaning: The concept of a body would be abrogated. This is correct in content, but a long way from the figure: Would that still be a body? In v 20[footnoteRef:122]*, however, the accent then shifts once more to the notion of unity.[footnoteRef:123]28 [119: * 19 If all were a single member, where would the body be? 20 As it is, there are many members, yet one body. 1 Corinthians 12:1920 (NRSV)] [120: 27 For the figure cf. Cic. Off. 3.5.22.] [121: * 19 If all were a single member, where would the body be? 1 Corinthians 12:19 (NRSV)] [122: * 20 As it is, there are many members, yet one body. 1 Corinthians 12:20 (NRSV)] [123: 28 For the working together of part and whole in the universum, see M. Aur. Ant., Medit. 2.3.]

21[footnoteRef:124]* This continues the dialogue between the members.[footnoteRef:125]29 That the eye comes before the head seems to have no particular reason.[footnoteRef:126]30 Both are generally recognized to be the two most outstanding parts of the body. , cannot, is held by Weiss to mean: it would [by nature] be impossible. No, but simply that it would be absurd. [124: * 21 The eye cannot say to the hand, I have no need of you, nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. 1 Corinthians 12:21 (NRSV)] [125: 29 For the style (parallelism with antistrophe) see Weiss.Weiss (see on v 14*) holds that vv 1420* were addressed to the less privileged, vv 2125* are now addressed to the more gifted who look down upon the others. He founds this interpretation on the use of the figure: up to this point, subordinate members were speaking to those of higher rank. But did Paul regard them as subordinate and introduce them as such into the figure? It is surely obvious that his point is the equality of rightsalso in terms of the figure as he understands it, cf. v 17*. Now (vv 21ff.*) it is true that privileged members are speaking, but once again only for the sake of the point. Cf. the change of style: in the former passage, the members were speaking among themselves, they were emancipating themselves.] [126: 30 And also that the eye is linked with the hand, the head with the foot. The individual members could be interchanged.]

22[footnoteRef:127]* Weiss thinks the expression , which are considered, is here not so suitable as , which we regard, in v 23[footnoteRef:128]*; for there is of course no doubt on the question of strength and weakness, and thus it is a case of an entirely correct opinion. In point of fact the expression is a shortened form of the parts which, because they are weaker, are considered less valuable; but they are necessary.[footnoteRef:129]31 [127: * 22 On the contrary, the members of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, 1 Corinthians 12:22 (NRSV)] [128: * 23 and those members of the body that we think less honorable we clothe with greater honor, and our less respectable members are treated with greater respect; 1 Corinthians 12:23 (NRSV)] [129: 31 Weiss. But it is reading too much into the text when he assumes that Paul is here contrasting , honor, and , truth, after the manner of the Stoics (see the index to Schenkls edition of Epictetus, s.v. ). Whatever the Stoic coloring, Paul has here, as always, no interest in philosophy as such, or no familiarity with it. Verse 22* is already thinking in the direction of v 23*: it is concerned with the idea of compensation as a pointer to conduct.]

23* In v 23* what v 22* has in view becomes visible: a kind of apologia for the weaker parts by means of a reference to the natural attitude toward them, namely, the compensation provided by custom.[footnoteRef:130]32 [130: 32 In , weak dishonorable unseemly, we have to seek neither a climax nor a definite division into categories (with Heinrici). Not so Weiss, according to whom indicates the trunk, , the private parts. For in a sexual sense see Dio Chrys., Or. 23(40).29; Gen 34:7*; Deut 24:1*; Sus 63 Th; cf. the substantive Ex 20:26*; Rev 16:15*. , treat with honor, Esth 1:20*; Prov 12:9*. , have, is interpreted by Weiss in terms of his stoicizing tendency: they have it already. It accords better with the train of thought (compensation) to render: they receive it (with Lietzmann). Phader., Fab. 4.16.5: naturae partes veste quas celat pudor, those natural parts which a sense of shame causes to be hidden by our clothing (Loeb, 327). The principle still appears in the Cynics shamelessness, the protest form which makes a show of life according to nature.]

The sequence of thought is not such that Paul theoretically takes the side of the nonpneumatics for a moment. He is arguing on the presumption that all are charismatics.[footnoteRef:131]33 [131: 33 The figure must not be pressed. According to the figure, all the gifts would have to be together if the body is to function. Paul, however, is not thinking of a fixed number of gifts, but of all necessary ones. There is nothing problematical about the fact that the community lives.]

2425[footnoteRef:132]* That the body is compounded together, from the elements, is a favorite expression of the Stoics among others.[footnoteRef:133]34 Paul had said above that man adjusts the natural distinctions between strong and weak, etc., and that this is a model for conduct in the community. Now he says that it is God who adjusts them, that is, practically speaking, nature. It is not difficult to balance the two statements: nature points us toward the correct attitude, see on 11:14[footnoteRef:134]*. [132: * 24 whereas our more respectable members do not need this. But God has so arranged the body, giving the greater honor to the inferior member, 25 that there may be no dissension within the body, but the members may have the same care for one another. 1 Corinthians 12:2425 (NRSV)] [133: 34 Cf. Epict., Diss. 2.23.3f.; M. Aur. Ant., Medit. 7.67. : Karl Reinhardt, Kosmos und Sympathie (Munich: Beck, 1926), 19; Ksemann, Leib, 40ff..] [134: * 14 Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair, it is degrading to him, 1 Corinthians 11:14 (NRSV)]

Verse 25[footnoteRef:135]* merely touches upon the figure (, body), draws the conclusion, comes back to the starting point, the , divisions (11:18[footnoteRef:136]*), and shows that these are determined by enthusiasm: in the body there can be no dissension,[footnoteRef:137]35 and to put it in positive terms, the body is the working together of the parts.[footnoteRef:138]36 [135: * 25 that there may be no dissension within the body, but the members may have the same care for one another. 1 Corinthians 12:25 (NRSV)] [136: * 18 For, to begin with, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you; and to some extent I believe it. 1 Corinthians 11:18 (NRSV)] [137: 35 This is possible only in the fable, which by its very form shows the impossibility.] [138: 36 Does Paul after all have the form of Menenius Agrippa in mind, from which it would be easier to derive this utilitarian application?]

26[footnoteRef:139]* The notion of sympathy is Stoic (though not indeed exclusively so). The cosmos is a vast body,[footnoteRef:140]37 that is shot through with sympathy. And man is part of the All which embraces men and holds them together.[footnoteRef:141]38 For the counterpart, , rejoice with, see 3:6[footnoteRef:142]*. [139: * 26 If one member suffers, all suffer together with it; if one member is honored, all rejoice together with it. 1 Corinthians 12:26 (NRSV)] [140: 37 Sext. Emp., Math. 9 (= Phys. 1 = Dogm, 3). 78f.; Epict., Diss. 1.14.2; Philo Migr. Abr. 178, 180; M. Aur. Ant., Medit. 5.26; 7.9; Sen., Ep. 95.52 (n. 8 above). Reinhardt, Kosmos und Sympathie, 4454. For sympathy between body and soul see Cleanthes in Diels, Fragmente 1:518. For sympathy see also Cic. Off. 3.5; Sext. Emp., Astrol. (= Math. 5) 44; Max. Tyr., Diss. 21.4f.; for the expression see Diod. S., Bibl. hist. 18.42.4: , all its members sharing (Loeb 9:133).] [141: 38 Not so Plut., Solon 18.5 (88c): , The lawgiver accustomed the citizens, as if members of one body, to sympathize and suffer with each other (cf. Loeb 1:453).] [142: * 6 I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth. 1 Corinthians 3:6 (NRSV)]

27[footnoteRef:143]* Verse 27* sums up. Here Paul comes back from the figure of an organism to the proper sense (body of Christ, see on v 13*). Now the body is no longer determined by the parts, but vice versa the parts by the whole. The figure may still be echoed in the expression .[footnoteRef:144]39 While the thought of v 27* does link up with the figure, namely, with the idea of unity which it, too, contains, yet it stands in isolation in between the figure and v 28[footnoteRef:145]*. This shows that Paul does not construct his view of the church on the basis of the idea of an organism, but can use the latter merely as an illustration. [143: * 27 Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. 1 Corinthians 12:27 (NRSV)] [144: 39 Weiss says: each for his own part, not as in 13:9ff.*. Lietzmann renders: taken singly, cf. 13:9*, 10*, 12*; Ep. Ar. 102.] [145: * 28 And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers; then deeds of power, then gifts of healing, forms of assistance, forms of leadership, various kinds of tongues. 1 Corinthians 12:28 (NRSV)]

28* Here Paul links up with the figure again, namely, with the thought of differentiation (and the demand for cooperation which is to be derived from the figure): in this way each man can be shown that his function is meaningful and necessary, that is, he can be pointed to the opportunity and norm of his work, namely, , building up.The chief forms of service are listed. The three outstanding ones are thrown into relief by the use of ordinal numbers.[footnoteRef:146]40 These are the three offices which according to Harnacks thesis on the dual office are charismatic offices, that is, offices common to the church as a whole, whose bearers wander from community to community.[footnoteRef:147]41 Against this, Kmmel objects that Paul knows nothing of a distinction between charismatic and other offices; for him all the functions in the community are charismatic. And Greeven[footnoteRef:148]42 declares that the prophets and teachers are not peripatetic. They are bound to the community; cf. the picture of prophecy in chap. 14.[footnoteRef:149]43 [146: 40 Notice that afterwards the construction is interrupted: ., some, etc., is not followed up.] [147: 41 Lietzmann, ad loc.; Adolf von Harnack, The Mission and Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries, ed. and tr. James Moffatt, vol. 1 (London: Williams and Norgate; New York: Putnam, 21908; reprinted New York: Harper, 1962), 319368 (Die Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten [Leipzig: Hinrichs, 41924] 1:332379).] [148: 42 Heinrich Greeven, Propheten, Lehrer, Vorsteher bei Paulus. Zur Frage der mter im Urchristentum, ZMW 44 (195253): 143; von Campenhausen, Ecclesiastical Authority, 6062 [65f.].] [149: 43 The figure of the wandering prophet has been read into the text from the Didache.]

These objections are correct in pointing out that there is no dual organization (individual community and church as a whole).[footnoteRef:150]44 [150: 44 Bultmann, Theology 2:103f. [455f.], observes that the work of the apostles and prophets does not mean a supracongregational organization, but it does manifest the church to be one.]

Apostles[footnoteRef:151]45 and prophets are also mentioned together elsewhere,[footnoteRef:152]46 and so, too, are apostles and teachers.[footnoteRef:153]47 The other forms of service cannot be so sharply defined; the designations indicate functions that are more of a technical kindadministrative work: , acts of helping;[footnoteRef:154]48 , acts of administration;[footnoteRef:155]49 for the , various kinds of (speaking with) tongues, see on 14:1*. [151: 45 See on 9:1ff.*; 15:3ff.*.] [152: 46 Eph 2:20*; 3:5*; 4:11*; Did. 11.3.] [153: 47 2 Tim 1:11*; Herm., Sim. 9.15.4; 9.16.5; 9.25.2; Vis. 3.5.1.] [154: 48 P. Oxy. 900.13; 2 Macc 8:19*; 3 Macc. 5.50*; Sir 11:12*; 51:7*.] [155: 49 Literally, piloting. The figure of the helmsman is very popular for ruling. Xenoph., Cyrop. 1.1.5; Plut. Sept. sap. conv. 162a.]

2930[footnoteRef:156]* In this list the technical forms of service, which Paul was the first to exalt to the rank of , are omitted. Cf. 12:46*. [156: * 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30 Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret? 1 Corinthians 12:2930 (NRSV)]

Verse 14:1b* would link up well with v 30[footnoteRef:157]*: Paul assents to the , but now establishes a new order of precedence by putting prophecy above tongues from the standpoint of , upbuilding. But first the thought is given a surprising new turn by v 31[footnoteRef:158]*. [157: * 30 Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret? 1 Corinthians 12:30 (NRSV)] [158: * 31 But strive for the greater gifts. And I will show you a still more excellent way. 1 Corinthians 12:31 (NRSV)]

31* In v 31*[footnoteRef:159]50 the connection with , but, is not good. Verse 31a*, to be sure, abides by the terminology used thus far (), Yet appears to bring a shift of accent with the summons , strive for:[footnoteRef:160]51 up to this point Paul had spoken of the gifts in terms of criticism and reduction. Certainly, the shift is understandable. His criticism was directed not at the gifts, but at the Corinthians self-understanding. Now he directs their attention to higher gifts, ones that allow of no self-development and no self-contemplation on the pneumatics part. All the same, the summons does not go smoothly with 14:1* either.[footnoteRef:161]52 And there is something remarkably antagonistic about the reference to the higher way that follows. goes attributively with : a still more excellent way.[footnoteRef:162]53 [159: 50 Instead of , higher, D G A have the reading (weak in point of content) or . better; R. V. G. Tasker, The Text of the Corpus Paulinum, NTS 1 (1955): 180191, here esp. 187f.. Instead of , still, p46 D* read (defended by Albert Debrunner, Lesarten der Chester Beatty Papyri, CN 11 [1947]: 3349, here esp. 37): and if there is anything that surpasses this, then I will show you the way. Anton Fridrichsen (in E. Lehmann and A. Fridrichsen, 1 Kor. 13. Eine christlich-stoische Diatribe, ThStKr 94 [1922]: 5595, here esp. 6570) puts forward the conjecture (see Harald Riesenfeld, La voie de charit: Note sur I Cor. XII, 31, Stud Theol 1 [194748]: 146157): , Strive for the higher gifts and everything utterly superlative: I will show you the way.] [160: 51 : Plut., Alex. 5 (, virtue, and , honor), see on 14:1*.] [161: 52 Gerhard Iber, Zum Verstndnis von I Cor 12, 31, ZNW 54 (1963): 4352, observes that the difficulty disappears if is taken as indicative: you are striving for. The clause describes the attitude of the community. The , higher-gifts, are then the ecstatic phenomena. Then the place of chap. 13 is also safeguarded from the literary standpoint; v 31a* and b go together, as the Corinthian position and the Pauline counter-position. 14a* is no counter-argument. For according to chap. 13 Paul can also react positively to their zeal. Moreover, he does not there speak of greater gifts; this expression contains criticism.] [162: 53 With Bauer, s.v. ; Wilhelm Michaelis, TDNT 5:85, rightly characterizes the phrase as stereotyped. Spicq, Agap 2:65, argues that corresponds not to a comparative, but to a superlative. Against this is , still (more). From the standpoint of content it is pointless to argue about this; naturally, this higher way is the highest. It acquires a certain significance only when to the comparative contained in we supply , than the gifts (Richard Reitzenstein, Die Formel Glaube, Liebe, Hoffnung, bei Paulus, NGG [1916]: 367416, here esp. 398, n. 2). Then faith, hope and love are not themselves .]

Excursus: , WayThe figure of the way is widespread.[footnoteRef:163]54 The Old Testament speaks of the ways that God takes, on which he leads his people or the individual. The conduct of life is a walking. Qumran dualistically contrasts the two ways that are determined by the two spirits (of light and of darkness).[footnoteRef:164]55 In addition to this, the contrasting of the two ways as ethical possibilities is a paraenetic pattern that was taken over by Christianity.[footnoteRef:165]56 [163: 54 Michaelis, TDNT 5:4296.] [164: 55 1QS III, 1315; S. Vernon McCasland, The Way, JBL 77 (1958): 222230.] [165: 56 As happens in the two recensions of a two-way catechism in the Didache and Barnabas.]

The symbolism of the way was employed by the Greeks from the time of Parmenides.[footnoteRef:166]57 Particularly closely related to the present passage is Philos royal way.[footnoteRef:167]58 It is the way that leads beyond the usual levels and possibilities of knowledge to the contemplation of God, whereby the divine expels the human .[footnoteRef:168]59 [166: 57 Parmenides, Fr. 1. He links up with the mysteries. The way to the light is the way to salvation. Werner Jaeger, Theology of the Early Greek Philosophers, tr. Edward S. Robinson (Oxford: Clarendon, 1947), 94100 (Die Theologie der frhen griechischen Denker [Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1953], 112118); Karl Deichgrber, Parmenides Auffahrt zur Gttin des Rechts, AAM, 1958, 11 (Mainz: Akademie der Wissenschaft und der Literatur, 1958); Otfried Becker, Das Bild des Weges und verwandte Vorstellungen im frhgriechischen Denken, Einzelschriften zum Hermes, 4 (Berlin: Weidmann, 1937). Heraclitus, Fr. 135 (in Diels, Fragmente 1:181): , The shortest way to fame, he said, is to become good [Trans.].] [167: 58 In connection with Num 20:17*; 21:22*; Pascher, Knigsweg.] [168: 59 Philo, Poster C. 101f.; Deus imm. 159167, 180; Ign., Eph. 9.1: love is , the way that leads up to God.]

Paul does not promise[footnoteRef:169]60 a way that leads to the , spiritual gifts, but one that leads beyond them; nor is it a way that leads to love, but love is the way, at the same time also the goal of the and , the pursuing and striving for (on this cf. Phil 3:12ff.[footnoteRef:170]*). The question will be whether Paul can show this higher possibility to be qualitatively different from the (other) . [169: 60 , I will show: Epict., Diss. 1.4.1017.] [170: * 12 Not that I have already obtained this or have already reached the goal; but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own. 13 Beloved, I do not consider that I have made it my own; but this one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead, 14 I press on toward the goal for the prize of the heavenly call of God in Christ Jesus. Philippians 3:1214 (NRSV)]

The Higher Way1 Corinthians 13131If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have no love, then I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2/And if I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have no love, then I am nothing. 3/And if I distribute all my possessions as alms, and if I give up my body to be burned,[footnoteRef:171]1 but have no love, then it avails me nothing. [171: 1 Variant reading , in order to boast of the fact, p46 A B. Yet this reading is presumably a simplifying correction (despite its cautious acceptance by Kenneth Willis Clark, Textual Criticism and Doctrine, Studia Paulina, 5265, here esp. 61f., and against the Greek NT). It is hardly likely that would be changed into (Spicq, Agap, 2:57f.). Moreover, , but have no love, is then no longer suitable (Lietzmann).]

4Love is long-suffering, love is kind, love[footnoteRef:172]2 is not jealous, not boastful, 5/not arrogant; it is not rude,[footnoteRef:173]3 it does not seek its own advantage,[footnoteRef:174]4 it is not irritable, it keeps no score of wrongs, 6/it does not rejoice over wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth.[footnoteRef:175]5 7/It covers everything,[footnoteRef:176]6 believes everything, hopes everything, endures everything. [172: 2 is considered by Zuntz, Text, 68, to be secondary (because of the rhythm and the sentence structure); it is omitted by B 33. But see R. V. G. Tasker, The Text of the Corpus Paulinum, NTS 1 (1955): 180191, here esp. 191. p46 has considerable variants in this section; see above, p. 1, n. 7.The first two members can be taken as chiasmus. It is not so good to place the comma after (Nestle) or to punctuate , , , (Lietzmann, Robertson and Plummer).] [173: 3 Variant reading , p46: does not give itself airs, supported by Albert Debrunner, Lesarten der Chester Beatty Papyri, CN 11 (1947): 3349, here esp. 3741; cf. Vulg. non est ambitiosa.] [174: 4 Variant reading , p46c B: what does not belong to it.] [175: 5 The meaning of the compound is here that of the simple verb, see Bauer, s.v.] [176: 6 Or, owing to the proximity of , perhaps better; it will bear; see the commentary.]

8Love never fails. Gifts of prophecythey will be destroyed. Tonguesthey will cease. Knowledgeit will be destroyed. 9/For our knowledge is fragmentary, and our prophesying is fragmentary. 10/But when the perfect comes, the fragmentary will be destroyed. 11/When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I thought as a child, I reasoned as a child. When I became a man, I did away with childish things. 12/For at present we see enigmatically, in a mirror, but then face to face. At present I know in part, but then I shall know fully, even as I am also fully known.13But now there remain faith, hope, love, these three. But the greatest of them is love.Prefatory Note to Chapter 13This chapter is a self-contained unity. The links with what goes before (12:31*) and after (14:1*) are ragged. There are also difficulties in regard to the content: in the context, the higher way is the way of love. This is at variance with 13:13[footnoteRef:177]*, according to which there are three highest gifts. Moreover, in the light of chap. 13 all the gifts so far mentioned are relatively degraded. This is at variance with the summons in 14:1*.[footnoteRef:178]* [177: * 13 And now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; and the greatest of these is love. 1 Corinthians 13:13 (NRSV)] [178: * According to Weiss, chap. 13 is here not in its original place. That Paul is recommending love as the greatest (Lietzmann) is not stated, and is in fact ruled out by the contrast between and love and by 14:1*. Chap. 13 makes the impression of an insertion; there are close links with chap. 8; both belong to the same letter (B?).]

Chapter 13[footnoteRef:179]7 stands out from its context as a unity sui generis. But internally the section is made up of different stylistic forms, which also make use of correspondingly different materials. The literary critics question, whether the passage originally stood in this context (see on 12:31*; 14:1*), is thereby sharpened, even to the extent of becoming a question of authenticity.[footnoteRef:180]8 At all events the passage must be expounded in the first instance on its own. We must set out from the form.[footnoteRef:181]9 [179: 7 Literature: Adolf von Harnack, Das hohe Lied des Apostels Paulus von der Liebe (I. Kor. 13) und seine religionsgeschichtliche Bedeutung, SAB (1911): 132163; E. Lehmann and Anton Fridrichsen, 1 Kor. 13. Eine christlchstoische Diatribe, ThStKr 94 (1922): 5595 (not by Paul); Ernst Hoffmann, Pauli Hymnus auf die Liebe, Deutsche Vierteljahrsschrift fr Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte 4 (1926): 5873; Nils W. Lund, The Literary Structure of Pauls Hymn to Love, JBL 50 (1931): 266276; Gunnar Rudberg, Hellas och Nya Testamentet (Stockholm: Svenska Kyrkans Diakornistyrelses Bokfrlag, 1929), 149f. (this passage reprinted as Gunnar Rudberg zu 1 Cor. 13, CN 3 [1938]: 32); Gnther Bornkamm, The More Excellent Way, Early Christian Experience, 180193 (Das Ende des Gesetzes, 93112; originally in Jahrbuch der theologischen Schule Bethel 8 [1937]: 132150); E. Hoffmann, Zu 1 Cor. 13 und Col. 3, 14, CN 3 (1938): 2831; Harald Riesenfeld, La voie de charit; Note sur 1 Cor. XII, 31, StudTheol 1 (194748): 146157; Note bibliographique sur I Cor. XIII, Nuntius 6 (1952): 47f.; Spicq, Agap 2:53120 (bibliography and the richest supply of material, also on all the individual issues); N. Johansson, I Cor. xiii and I Cor. xiv, NTS 10 (196364): 383392 (love=Christ).] [180: 8 Eric L. Titus, Did Paul Write 1 Corinthians 13? JBR 27 (1959): 299302.] [181: 9 On the form, cf. above all Weiss; Bornkamm, The More Excellent Way; Spicq, Agap 2:53120.]

The divisions are clear: (a) vv 13[footnoteRef:182]*; (b) vv 47[footnoteRef:183]*; (c) vv 812[footnoteRef:184]*.[footnoteRef:185]10 The surprising wealth of Greek and Jewish parallels points in the first instance to the assumption of Greek motifs by Hellenistic Judaism and their transformation in the style of the Jewish Wisdom tradition.[footnoteRef:186]11 The most important Greek parallels are provided by Tyrtaeus, Plato, Maximus of Tyre; the most important Jewish parallel is 3 Ezra 4:3440. [182: * 1 If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give away all my possessions, and if I hand over my body so that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing. 1 Corinthians 13:13 (NRSV)] [183: * 4 Love is patient; love is kind; love is not envious or boastful or arrogant 5 or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; 6 it does not rejoice in wrongdoing, but rejoices in the truth. 7 It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. 1 Corinthians 13:47 (NRSV)] [184: * 8 Love never ends. But as for prophecies, they will come to an end; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will come to an end. 9 For we know only in part, and we prophesy only in part; 10 but when the complete comes, the partial will come to an end. 11 When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became an adult, I put an end to childish ways. 12 For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then we will see face to face. Now I know only in part; then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known. 1 Corinthians 13:812 (NRSV)] [185: 10 Weiss is too schematic in contending that we have here again the division a b a, the third part returning to the charismata. The rest of his characterization is excellent. In vv 13* the protases follow each other with the anaphora . The climax lies in the middle; the number of syllables is 16; 25+18; 1.3+16. To the shortest protasis there corresponds the longest and weightiest apodosis (1546 syllables). The second part is characterized by antithetical, and in part rhymelike, clauses. This part could stand on its own (see Gerhard von Rad, below, n. 51). In this part love is the subject. The third part consists of the heading v 8a*, three anaphorical and antistrophic parallelisms v 8b*, c, d (according to Weiss with the rhyme pattern a b a); there follows in vv 9f.* an antithetical parallelism, in v 11* an antithesis, in v 12* a double antithesis, in v 13* the thesis with a coda.] [186: 11 For the motifs, cf. Wisd 7:22ff.*, the description of by means of 21 predicates, the last of which describe its effect; cf. the conclusion in verbal form.Mens relationship to it is defined as , dwelling with, through which we become beloved of God.Totally different is Spicqs verdict on chap. 13. He holds (as also does Hoffmann) that it is not a hymn, but paraenesis and contains almost word-for-word allusions to the situation in Corinth. For the style he points to Ps 138:8f.*; Ab. 6.6. But these passages are somewhat far afield. For the rest, it is a matter of definition whether or not we would speak of a hymn. Moreover, the multiplicity of stylistic forms and the concentration of allusions to the context in particular passages has to be kept in mind. The verdict on the form also partially determines that on the religioushistorical context. Classical scholars (Hoffmann, Rudberg) tend to discover the Platonic element. An oddity is the attempt to trace the chapter to the influence of Epicurus, Norman Wentworth De Witt, St. Paul und Epicurus (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1954).]

This last text comes particularly close, both in style and in content.[footnoteRef:187]12 It is an aretalogy of , truth;[footnoteRef:188]13 the style bears the mark of Wisdom.[footnoteRef:189]14 [187: 12 Date of origin: ca. 165 b.c. (after Daniel) to a.d. 90 (Josephus knows the book); see Otto Eissfeldt, The Old Testament: An Introduction, tr. Peter R. Ackroyd (Oxford: Blackwell; New York: Harper & Row, 1965), 574576 (Einleitung in das Alte Testament [Tbingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 31964], 777781); on 3 Ezra, on the inserted story of the three pages (3:14:42*), and on the aretalogy of truth, see Wilhelm Rudolph, Esra und Nehemia, HAT, 20 (Tbingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1949), IVXIX.] [188: 13 The symposium motif in the surrounding narrative points to Greek (and Persian?) tradition. For the motif see, apart from Plato and Xenophon, Plut., Sept. sap. conv.; Quaest. conv.; Ep. Ar. 182294. Josef Martin, Symposion, Die Geschichte einer literarischen Form, Studien zur Geschichte und Kultur des Altertums, 17, 12 (Paderborn: Schningh, 1931).] [189: 14 Cf. the hymnic praise of , Prov 8; Sir 24; Wis 7.]

Excursus: The Parallels1. Tyrtaeus, fr. 12 (=fr. 9 in Diehls ed.):[footnoteRef:190]15 [190: 15 See Werner Jaeger, Tyrtaeus on True Arete, in his Five Essays, tr. Adele M. Fiske (Montreal: Casalani, 1966), 103142 (Scripta Minora [Rome: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 1960] 2:75114; originally in SAB [1932]: 537568); Bornkamm, The More Excellent Way.]

, , , , , , , , . , .I would neither call a man to mind nor put him in my tale for prowess in the race or the wrestling, not even had he the stature and strength of a Cyclops and surpassed in swiftness the Thracian Northwind, nor were he a comelier man than Tithonus and a richer than Midas or Cinyras, nor though he were a greater king than Pelops son of Tantalus, and had Adrastus suasiveness of tongue, nor yet though all fame were his save of warlike strength; for a man is not good in war if he have not endured the sight of bloody slaughter and stood nigh and reached forth to strike the foe. This is prowess [literally, virtue], this is the noblest prize and the fairest for a lad to win in the world (Loeb 1:75). The question is that of the supreme virtue, not merely in the sense that it surpasses all the other virtues, but that it first brings them to perfection.[footnoteRef:191]16 [191: 16 The question is a topas; Xenophanes, Fr.. 2: Wisdom is the highest virtue. Theogn., El. 1:699718: the highest good is wealth; also Plat., Leg. 630f.. For the theme ;, which is the greatest? see Plat., Leg. 661a. Ulrich Schmid, Die Priamel der Werte im Griechischen von Homer bis Paulus (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1964) (review of the material, analysis of the form); Bruno W. Dombrowski, Wertepriameln in hellenistisch-jdischer und urchristlicher Literatur, ThZ 22 (1966): 396402.]

2. Plato, [footnoteRef:192]Symp.197c197e:[footnoteRef:193]17 [192: Symp. Symposion.] [193: 17 This is an ironical imitation of the style of the tragedian Agathon. Notice the transition from verbs (subject Eros) to nouns and adjectives.]

, , . , , , . , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .Thus I conceive, Phaedrus, that Love was originally of surpassing beauty and goodness, and is latterly the cause of similar excellencies in others. And now I am moved to summon the aid of verse, and tell how it is he who makesPeace among men, and a windless waveless main;Repose for winds, and slumber in our pain.He it is who casts alienation out, draws intimacy in; he brings us together in all such friendly gatherings as the present; at feasts and dances and oblations he makes himself our leader; politeness contriving, moroseness outdriving; kind giver of amity, giving no enmity; gracious to the good; a marvel to the wise, a delight to the gods; coveted of such as share him not, treasured of such as good share have got; father of luxury, tenderness, elegance, graces and longing and yearning; careful of the good, careless of the bad; in toil and fear, in drink and discourse, our trustiest helmsman, boatswain, champion, deliverer; ornament of all gods and men; leader fairest and best, whom every one should follow, joining tunefully in the burthen of his song, wherewith he enchants the thought of every god and man ([footnoteRef:194]Loeb 5:159, 161, slightly modified). [194: Loeb Loeb Classical Library]

3. [footnoteRef:195]Max. Tyr., Diss. 20.2 (ed. Hobein; = 16.2 ed. Dbner): Love is not found among the barbarians, because there is no freedom there. [195: Max. Tyr., Dissertationes]

, , . , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . , , , , .But nothing is so hostile to love as necessity. For it is a thing superb and free in the extreme, and even more free than Sparta herself. For love alone of every thing pertaining to men, when it subsists with purity, neither admires wealth, nor dreads a tyrant, nor is astonished by empire, nor avoids a court of judicature, nor flies from death. It does not consider as dire either wild beasts, or fire, or a precipice, or the sea, or a sword, or a halter; but to it things impervious are most pervious, things dire are most easily vanquished, things terrible are most readily encountered, and things difficult are most speedily accomplished. All rivers are passable, tempests most navigable, mountains most easily run over. It is everywhere confident, despises [or surveys] all things, and subdues all things (The Dissertations of Maximus Tyrius, tr. Thomas Taylor [London: C. Whittingham, 1804], 1:103).4. 3 Ezra 4:3440: , ; , , , . ; . , , , . , , , , , , . . , , . . .And he began to speak about truth: Gentlemen, are not women strong? The earth is vast, and heaven is high, and the sun is swift in its course, for it makes the circuit of the heavens and returns to its place in one day. Is he not great who does these things? But truth is greater, and stronger than all things. The whole earth calls upon truth, and heaven blesses her. All Gods works quake and tremble, and with him there is nothing unrighteous. Wine is unrighteous, the king is unrighteous, women are unrighteous, all the sons of men are unrighteous, all their works are unrighteous, and all such things. There is no truth in them and in their unrighteousness they will perish. But truth endures and is strong for ever, and lives and prevails for ever and ever. With her there is no partiality or preference, but she does what is righteous instead of anything that is unrighteous or wicked. All men approve her deeds, and there is nothing unrighteous in her judgment. To her belongs the strength and the kingship and the power and the majesty of all the ages. Blessed be the God of truth! ([footnoteRef:196]RSV, vv 33b40[footnoteRef:197]*). [196: RSV Revised Standard Version of the Bible] [197: * 33 Then the king and the nobles looked at one another; and he began to speak about truth: 34 Gentlemen, are not women strong? The earth is vast, and heaven is high, and the sun is swift in its course, for it makes the circuit of the heavens and returns to its place in one day. 35 Is not the one who does these things great? But truth is great, and stronger than all things. 36 The whole earth calls upon truth, and heaven blesses it. All Gods works quake and tremble, and with him there is nothing unrighteous. 37 Wine is unrighteous, the king is unrighteous, women are unrighteous, all human beings are unrighteous, all their works are unrighteous, and all such things. There is no truth in them and in their unrighteousness they will perish. 38 But truth endures and is strong forever, and lives and prevails forever and ever. 39 With it there is no partiality or preference, but it does what is righteous instead of anything that is unrighteous or wicked. Everyone approves its deeds, 40 and there is nothing