Ritröð Guðfræðistofnunar - 01.09.1994, Blaðsíða 106

Clarence Edvin Glad
Summary
The above article offers a new reading of 1 Corinthians 8, arguing that this
chapter and its wider literary context discloses a debate between Paul and
the „wise” in Corinth on pedagogical matters. Such a reading rejects the
common apocalyptic understanding of the words ccttóAÁumi in 1 Cor 8:11
and ocp^co in 1 Cor 9:22. Although many of Paul's expressions and views
on social, ethical and religious issues can rightly be explained in reference
to his apocalyptic expectations of the end of things as presently known, the
literary form of 1 Corinthians 8 and 9 surely cannot be construed as being
„apocalypic” in any meaningful sense. Thus, although Paul uses here the
terms „salvation” and „destruction” common in apocalyptic literature, this
paper demonstrates their widespread use in a totally different literary
context, namely, in Graeco-Roman moral and psychagogic literature
treating friendship and flattery and the importance of adaptability in
moral guidance. Such a usage, together with the specific issue with which
Paul deals in 1 Corinthians 8 and 9, suggests that Paul means to concem
himself with the nurture of those insecure in their newly fovmd faith. The
wise thwart the progress of the insecure by eating the meat offered to
idols. This insensitive behavior „wounds” the conscience of the weak (cf.
TÚTTTEiv in 1 Cor 8:12); instead of „destroying” the weak, the wise should
„save” them.
Paul's argument in 1 Corinthians 8 reveals that the wise first
attempted rationally to persuade the weak of their illogical position in
order to cure the weak of their irrational false beliefs and passions about
the pagan gods and the meat offered to such gods. The wise, by eating
meat in the temple of an idol, then encouraged the weak to do the same.
Guidance through precepts or examples follows the eradication of mistaken
beliefs. In the early Christian community of Corinth persons enjoying a
superior moral status and spiritual aptitude helped to nurtnre and correct
others, guiding their souls in moral and religious (re)formation. Paul does
not question this practice but rejects the stringent manner in which the
wise attempted to persuade the weak of the untenability of their beliefs.
In his criticism of the wise and his guidance of the weak, Paul himself
functions as a psychagogue („leader of souls”), adapting his leadership
style as required in each individual case.
Contrary to the „wise” of Corinth, Paul subscribes to an affable and
versatile leadership model which he succinctly articulates in 1 Cor 9:19-23.
104