Anointing in Paul: 2 Corinthians 1.21-22 and 2.14-16.

[Ken Olson]

I think there is some evidence in 2 Corinthians that Paul used the word Christ to describe [Jesus] and that the nomen sacrum Chi-Sigma overline (with different endings according to case) was used to abbreviate Christ.

2 Corinthians 1.21-22:

1.21 But it is God who establishes us with you in [Christ], and has anointed us; 22 he has put his seal upon us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee.

In this case, Paul is using the metaphor of anointing to refer to the reception of the Holy Spirit through Baptism. Why that metaphor? Because he has just referred to [Christ] the anointed one (and in v. 19 preceding as well). It might be necessary to go outside of Paul to interpret this - Jesus receives the Holy Spirit in the John the Baptist narratives in all four gospels, though he is not said to have been baptized by John in Luke or John.

2 Corinthians 2.14-15

2.14 But thanks be to God, who in [Christ] always leads us in triumph, and through us spreads the fragrance of the knowledge of him everywhere. 15 For we are the aroma of [Christ] to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing, 16 to one a fragrance from death to death, to the other a fragrance from life to life

Paul is using the metaphors of fragrance and aroma to describe the spread of the Christian message. The reason for this particular metaphor is that [Christ] is aromatic because the word means Anointed One and anointing oil is aromatic.

We find this in John 12.1-2:

John 12.1 Six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, where Laz′arus was, whom Jesus had raised from the dead. 2 There they made him a supper; Martha served, and Laz′arus was one of those at table with him. 3 Mary took a pound of costly ointment of pure nard and anointed the feet of Jesus and wiped his feet with her hair; and the house was filled with the fragrance of the ointment.

But the concept of an aromatic anointing goes back to the Old Testament, as in in Exodus 30.22-33:

Exodus 30:22 Moreover, the Lord said to Moses, 23 “Take the finest spices: of liquid myrrh five hundred shekels, and of sweet-smelling cinnamon half as much, that is, two hundred and fifty, and of aromatic cane two hundred and fifty, 24 and of cassia five hundred, according to the shekel of the sanctuary, and of olive oil a hin; 25 and you shall make of these a sacred anointing oil blended as by the perfumer; a holy anointing oil it shall be. 26 And you shall anoint with it the tent of meeting and the ark of the testimony, 27 and the table and all its utensils, and the lampstand and its utensils, and the altar of incense, 28 and the altar of burnt offering with all its utensils and the laver and its base; 29 you shall consecrate them, that they may be most holy; whatever touches them will become holy. 30 And you shall anoint Aaron and his sons, and consecrate them, that they may serve me as priests. 31 And you shall say to the people of Israel, ‘This shall be my holy anointing oil throughout your generations. 32 It shall not be poured upon the bodies of ordinary men, and you shall make no other like it in composition; it is holy, and it shall be holy to you. 33 Whoever compounds any like it or whoever puts any of it on an outsider shall be cut off from his people.’”

It's also found in the Song of Solomon:

Song of Solomon 1.3 your anointing oils are fragrant, your name is oil poured out;

Best,

Ken

[Peter Kirby]

Thank you for this, Ken. I will add these to the outline of potentially 'noteworthy' references.

[Peter Kirby]

2 Corinthians 2.14-15

2.14 But thanks be to God, who in [Christ] always leads us in triumph, and through us spreads the fragrance of the knowledge of him everywhere. 15 For we are the aroma of [Christ] to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing, 16 to one a fragrance from death to death, to the other a fragrance from life to life

Paul is using the metaphors of fragrance and aroma to describe the spread of the Christian message. The reason for this particular metaphor is that [Christ] is aromatic because the word means Anointed One and anointing oil is aromatic.

The connection could be slightly more direct than that. Instead of relying on this train of thought:

Christos -> Anointed One (as used by the Septuagint / Jewish people) -> which requires anointing oil -> fragrant

The original (and contemporary, to the extent it was used) Greek sense of the word could (also?) be evocated here:

https://lsj.gr/wiki/%CF%87%CF%81%CE%B9% ... F%8C%CF%82

to be rubbed on, used as ointment or salve, opp. πιστός, A.Pr.480, cf. E.Hipp.516, Triclin.ad Theoc.11.1; τὸ ἔλαιον τὸ χ.

to be rubbed on, φάρμακα χριστά salves, Aesch., Eur.

Making this connection doesn't require the reader to have knowledge of the Septuagint / particularly Jewish use of the word (as the anointed one).

But this is a minor point. I agree with what you're saying.

[Peter Kirby]

2.14 But thanks be to God, who in [Christ] always leads us in triumph, and through us spreads the fragrance of the knowledge of him everywhere

English translations struggle and fail to present the same word order as the Greek here. This adjustment gets closer, preserving the adjacency of the words for "fragrance" and for "Christ":

But thanks be to God, who always leads us in triumph in [Christ], and the fragrance (εν τω χω και την οσμην) of the knowledge of him through us [he] spreads everywhere.

[Ken Olson]

2 Corinthians 2.14-15

2.14 But thanks be to God, who in [Christ] always leads us in triumph, and through us spreads the fragrance of the knowledge of him everywhere. 15 For we are the aroma of [Christ] to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing, 16 to one a fragrance from death to death, to the other a fragrance from life to life

Paul is using the metaphors of fragrance and aroma to describe the spread of the Christian message. The reason for this particular metaphor is that [Christ] is aromatic because the word means Anointed One and anointing oil is aromatic.

The connection could be slightly more direct than that. Instead of relying on this train of thought:

Christos -> Anointed One (as used by the Septuagint / Jewish people) -> which requires anointing oil -> fragrant

The original (and contemporary, to the extent it was used) Greek sense of the word could (also?) be evocated here:

https://lsj.gr/wiki/%CF%87%CF%81%CE%B9% ... F%8C%CF%82

to be rubbed on, used as ointment or salve, opp. πιστός, A.Pr.480, cf. E.Hipp.516, Triclin.ad Theoc.11.1; τὸ ἔλαιον τὸ χ.

to be rubbed on, φάρμακα χριστά salves, Aesch., Eur.

Making this connection doesn't require the reader to have knowledge of the Septuagint / particularly Jewish use of the word (as the anointed one).

But this is a minor point. I agree with what you're saying.

Right. We are not far apart on this (if at all). I agree that even a Hellene (pagan Greek) reader or hearer of the letter with no experience of the Septuagint could have made the connection between Christos (anointed or oiled) and fragrance/aroma. However, I would argue that Paul himself was deeply steeped in the Septuagint and could not plausibly have been unaware of the Septuagintal connections.

I have a previous post on Paul's knowledge of the Septuagint (relying on E.P. Sanders) here:

viewtopic.php?p=129355#p129355

Best,

Ken

[Peter Kirby]

Paul is using the metaphors of fragrance and aroma to describe the spread of the Christian message. The reason for this particular metaphor is that [Christ] is aromatic because the word means Anointed One and anointing oil is aromatic.

However, I would argue that Paul himself was deeply steeped in the Septuagint and could not plausibly have been unaware of the Septuagintal connections.

I have a previous post on Paul's knowledge of the Septuagint (relying on E.P. Sanders) here:

viewtopic.php?p=129355#p129355

Yes, I agree entirely.

[robert j]

---

---

Ken, A couple of weeks before you posted this, KK responded to my question about evidence in Paul's letters for the Jesus figure to be a "Christ". KK admitted that "There may not be clear evidence", but suggested the very same two passages that you have here. I followed-up and described why I don't think that either of those passages provides effective evidence for the Jesus in Paul's letters to have been named as a "Christ".

I think there is some evidence in 2 Corinthians that Paul used the word Christ to describe [Jesus] and that the nomen sacrum Chi-Sigma overline (with different endings according to case) was used to abbreviate Christ.

2 Corinthians 1.21-22:

1.21 But it is God who establishes us with you in [Christ], and has anointed us; 22 he has put his seal upon us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee.

In this case, Paul is using the metaphor of anointing to refer to the reception of the Holy Spirit through Baptism. Why that metaphor? Because he has just referred to [Christ] the anointed one (and in v. 19 preceding as well). It might be necessary to go outside of Paul to interpret this - Jesus receives the Holy Spirit in the John the Baptist narratives in all four gospels, though he is not said to have been baptized by John in Luke or John.

2 Corinthians 2.14-15

2.14 But thanks be to God, who in [Christ] always leads us in triumph, and through us spreads the fragrance of the knowledge of him everywhere. 15 For we are the aroma of [Christ] to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing, 16 to one a fragrance from death to death, to the other a fragrance from life to life

Paul is using the metaphors of fragrance and aroma to describe the spread of the Christian message. The reason for this particular metaphor is that [Christ] is aromatic because the word means Anointed One and anointing oil is aromatic. ...

What evidence in Paul’s letters would indicate that Paul’s JC figure was an “anointed” savior (Christos) rather than a “good” savior (Chrestos)?

There may not be clear evidence, but there are a few passages in which an "anointed one" (Christ) makes more sense than a "good one" (Chrest), namely when Paul refers to the meaning of Christ as the "anointed one".
 

2 Corinthians 1:21	Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed (χρίσας) us, is God;
2 Corinthians 2:14f.	Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us in every place. For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish:

ETA: I have replaced this woefully inadequate response with more appropriate interpretations in my third post on page 2 of this thread.

Here is my response to KK"s suggestions, freed of the "quote" box ---

It was 2 Corinthians 1:21 that contributed to my doubts about Paul’s JC figure as a “Christ”, as an “anointed” figure. Take a look at the wider passage ...

It was 2 Corinthians 1:21 that contributed to my doubts about Paul’s JC figure as a “Christ”, as an “anointed” figure. Take a look at the wider passage (Berean Literal Bible) ---

19For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, having been proclaimed among you by us—by me and Silvanus and Timothy—was not “Yes” and “No,” but it has always been “Yes” in Him. 20For as many as are the promises of God, in Him is the “Yes.” Therefore also in Him, the “Amen” by us is for glory to God. 21Now the One establishing us with you unto Christ, and having anointed us, is God, 22the One also having sealed us and having given the pledge of the Spirit in our hearts. (2 Corinthians 1:19-22)

So, in this translation, we have 4 anointed figures – Jesus Christ, Paul Christ, Timothy Christ, and Silvanus Christ.

Kings, priests, and prophets were commonly anointed in the Jewish scriptures. Certainly Paul could have seen himself and his junior-partners as prophets, and having been anointed in that sense.

Paul did sometimes personalize his own experience with that of his JC in a figurative sense (“I have been crucified with Christ”, Gal, 2:20). But for Paul to claim the title, and the mantle of the “Christ”, not only for himself but also for Silvanus and Timothy --- wouldn’t that very significantly downgrade the title and the exceptional nature of Paul’s savior figure?

For 2 Corinthians 2:14, I think tying together the concept of a sweet smell with having been anointed with oil in that verse is too much of a stretch based on the way Paul used the concept of a sweet smell for money ---

But I have all things, and abound. I am full, having received from Epaphroditus the things from you, an odor of a sweet smell (εὐωδίας), an acceptable sacrifice, well-pleasing to God. (Philippians 4:18)

[Ken Olson]

---

---

Ken, A couple of weeks before you posted this, KK responded to my question about evidence in Paul's letters for the Jesus figure to be a "Christ". KK admitted that "There may not be clear evidence", but suggested the very same two passages that you have here. I followed-up and described why I don't think that either of those passages provides effective evidence for the Jesus in Paul's letters to have been named as a "Christ".

I think there is some evidence in 2 Corinthians that Paul used the word Christ to describe [Jesus] and that the nomen sacrum Chi-Sigma overline (with different endings according to case) was used to abbreviate Christ.

2 Corinthians 1.21-22:

1.21 But it is God who establishes us with you in [Christ], and has anointed us; 22 he has put his seal upon us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee.

In this case, Paul is using the metaphor of anointing to refer to the reception of the Holy Spirit through Baptism. Why that metaphor? Because he has just referred to [Christ] the anointed one (and in v. 19 preceding as well). It might be necessary to go outside of Paul to interpret this - Jesus receives the Holy Spirit in the John the Baptist narratives in all four gospels, though he is not said to have been baptized by John in Luke or John.

2 Corinthians 2.14-15

2.14 But thanks be to God, who in [Christ] always leads us in triumph, and through us spreads the fragrance of the knowledge of him everywhere. 15 For we are the aroma of [Christ] to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing, 16 to one a fragrance from death to death, to the other a fragrance from life to life

Paul is using the metaphors of fragrance and aroma to describe the spread of the Christian message. The reason for this particular metaphor is that [Christ] is aromatic because the word means Anointed One and anointing oil is aromatic. ...

What evidence in Paul’s letters would indicate that Paul’s JC figure was an “anointed” savior (Christos) rather than a “good” savior (Chrestos)?

There may not be clear evidence, but there are a few passages in which an "anointed one" (Christ) makes more sense than a "good one" (Chrest), namely when Paul refers to the meaning of Christ as the "anointed one".
 

2 Corinthians 1:21	Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed (χρίσας) us, is God;
2 Corinthians 2:14f.	Now thanks be unto God, which always causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour of his knowledge by us in every place. For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish:

I was going through the New Testament looking for Christ-adjacent language that might help decode the nomina sacra, such as words cognate with Christ. But I remember having seen Kunigunde Kreuzerin's post earlier on this and I was remiss in not crediting her with the idea.

Best,

Ken

Further argument to follow when I have the time.

[Secret Alias]

And all of this ignores the Marcionite critique of the orthodox New Testament = interpolation. Just because "it's there" doesn't mean it was original. Look at the three different lengths of the Ignatius's letters. The Marcionite version of the Pauline letters likely matched the Ignatian canon. Look at Matthew and Luke as (unrecognized) expansions of Mark. The idea that "because it's there" it's original is laughable but followed without question because, I would argue, of a basic lack of interest in anything other than the preprogrammed understanding of "what is real" in the Bible (pretty much everything).The idea that "everyone" accepted "everything" in the Bible is so fucking déclassé but unfortunately the starting point of almost everyone in the field. What did Origen write? Here are the books of Origen. What about Origen starting and rewriting his works? It's still Origen. Really?

[Ken Olson]

Here is my response to KK"s suggestions, freed of the "quote" box ---

It was 2 Corinthians 1:21 that contributed to my doubts about Paul’s JC figure as a “Christ”, as an “anointed” figure. Take a look at the wider passage ...

It was 2 Corinthians 1:21 that contributed to my doubts about Paul’s JC figure as a “Christ”, as an “anointed” figure. Take a look at the wider passage (Berean Literal Bible) ---

19For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, having been proclaimed among you by us—by me and Silvanus and Timothy—was not “Yes” and “No,” but it has always been “Yes” in Him. 20For as many as are the promises of God, in Him is the “Yes.” Therefore also in Him, the “Amen” by us is for glory to God. 21Now the One establishing us with you unto Christ, and having anointed us, is God, 22the One also having sealed us and having given the pledge of the Spirit in our hearts. (2 Corinthians 1:19-22)

So, in this translation, we have 4 anointed figures – Jesus Christ, Paul Christ, Timothy Christ, and Silvanus Christ.

Kings, priests, and prophets were commonly anointed in the Jewish scriptures. Certainly Paul could have seen himself and his junior-partners as prophets, and having been anointed in that sense.

Paul did sometimes personalize his own experience with that of his JC in a figurative sense (“I have been crucified with Christ”, Gal, 2:20). But for Paul to claim the title, and the mantle of the “Christ”, not only for himself but also for Silvanus and Timothy --- wouldn’t that very significantly downgrade the title and the exceptional nature of Paul’s savior figure?

For 2 Corinthians 2:14, I think tying together the concept of a sweet smell with having been anointed with oil in that verse is too much of a stretch based on the way Paul used the concept of a sweet smell for money ---

But I have all things, and abound. I am full, having received from Epaphroditus the things from you, an odor of a sweet smell (εὐωδίας), an acceptable sacrifice, well-pleasing to God. (Philippians 4:18)

Leaving aside the argument you made regarding money in Phillipians 4.18 for the moment, is your argument that the fact that Paul refers to himself, Silvanus, and Timothy as having been anointed by God in 1.21 lessens the likelihood that the nomen sacrum XS refers to Christos (or XN refers to Christon in this specific case) because applying the word to himself and his co-workers would 'very significantly downgrade the title [Christ] and the exceptional nature of Paul's savior figure'; that is, he would not spread the unique title of Christ to other people, but would reserve it for Jesus Christ alone.

To put the question another way: are you saying only that the Kunigunde's (and my) argument is ineffective in establishing that XS (actually XN) abbreviates Christos here, or are you making the stronger claim that it is unlikely XS does abbreviate Christos, and it more likely abbreviates something else, such as Chrestos specifically?

Best,

Ken