Re: 1 Corinthians 14:34, 35 Not Authentic Say Cambridge Scholars
Posted: Mon Jul 30, 2018 10:04 am
Ben,
I only argue Cambridge group has a hidden weight of the sociopolitical pressure in their decision making. I do not extend that to most exegetes.
Yes, you can do that with 33b. Which is what you are forced to do, and what exegetes do. I conceded that. A bridge to far to argue that about a nonsense sentence. Very bad argument on my part. I rescind it. Good point Ben.
**************
But even here I think it's easier to argue the internal conflict between verses 14:26-33 and verses 14:36-38 (as well as with verses 14:22-25) argues for those to have been later additions. Not only are they not attested in Marcion (as an early witness, but this alone is not close to enough of an argument), but they show a different internal situation. In verses 14:21, 26-33 prophecy and tongues are allowed and considered part of the normal practice, with mostly a call for order in the assembly. We are looking at a world with Christians alone in the assembly (a consistency in the attested Marcionite verses across all the Pauline letters).
But when we look at verses 14:36-38 we are seeing two significant later developments. First the authority of the prophecy and tongues are largely voided, negating the prior verses. Second, the authority of the letters of Paul is cited and claimed to be a command of the lord, and that the letter is the standard for being recognized. In short it is pointing to an era where schism within the congregation has developed to a point where orthodoxy needs to intervene, and the standard is no long Paul himself but looking back at his letters. This implies a clerical hierarchy to determine what is acceptable and what is not.
I would extend the material which is secondary to verses 14:39-40 as well, as they seem tacked on to 14:36-38 to compromise, saying OK we laid down the law of Orthodoxy, but we don't ban it. These verses only make sense if 14:36-38 are present, otherwise they are making a point not necessary, since there is no hint of the practices of charisma being limited or banned, simply orderly.
I would also extend the inserted material to 14:22-25 because we are looking at yet another development from a later era in Christianity, the concern with the image of Christianity in the larger community. The argument here is the exclusion of απιστοις, or non Christians, because tongues are a sign (σημειον) for the faithful (τοις πιστευουσιν). They are worried about the image to unsophisticated (unschooled or "idiots") and non-Christians who come to the assemblies (ιδιωται η απιστοι). This is a curious situation. We are definitely past the era of the house church, and into something much larger and more formal, such that it's large enough to draw in the curious passerby (note 14:24 contains ἐλέγχω, a rather rare word associated with the pastoral layers for reproving unsound thought and doctrine, this being the only occurrence in the ten letters of Paul besides two verse in Ephesians). Verse 14:25 has too many language problems to cover in a short post (three unusual words, four associated with the pastoral layer), but causing the unbelievers to fall down and worship God seems a bizarre reason to ban something. Unless that is the issue is hierarchical control of content.
Anyway, these verses simply highlight something rather prominent in verses not attested in the Marcionite version, strong emphasis on rank and order, and relations as large and very visible community with the outside non-Christian community. It concerns a church large enough to not have intimate control over all it's members. In short it's a church well past the initial founding days, possibly a couple generations past, where all sorts of organizational and interfaith concerns have moved to the surface. These could hardly be the concerns of an itinerant preacher founding small house churches and spreading the Gospel, which Paul was supposed to be.
I only argue Cambridge group has a hidden weight of the sociopolitical pressure in their decision making. I do not extend that to most exegetes.
Yes, you can do that with 33b. Which is what you are forced to do, and what exegetes do. I conceded that. A bridge to far to argue that about a nonsense sentence. Very bad argument on my part. I rescind it. Good point Ben.
**************
But even here I think it's easier to argue the internal conflict between verses 14:26-33 and verses 14:36-38 (as well as with verses 14:22-25) argues for those to have been later additions. Not only are they not attested in Marcion (as an early witness, but this alone is not close to enough of an argument), but they show a different internal situation. In verses 14:21, 26-33 prophecy and tongues are allowed and considered part of the normal practice, with mostly a call for order in the assembly. We are looking at a world with Christians alone in the assembly (a consistency in the attested Marcionite verses across all the Pauline letters).
But when we look at verses 14:36-38 we are seeing two significant later developments. First the authority of the prophecy and tongues are largely voided, negating the prior verses. Second, the authority of the letters of Paul is cited and claimed to be a command of the lord, and that the letter is the standard for being recognized. In short it is pointing to an era where schism within the congregation has developed to a point where orthodoxy needs to intervene, and the standard is no long Paul himself but looking back at his letters. This implies a clerical hierarchy to determine what is acceptable and what is not.
I would extend the material which is secondary to verses 14:39-40 as well, as they seem tacked on to 14:36-38 to compromise, saying OK we laid down the law of Orthodoxy, but we don't ban it. These verses only make sense if 14:36-38 are present, otherwise they are making a point not necessary, since there is no hint of the practices of charisma being limited or banned, simply orderly.
I would also extend the inserted material to 14:22-25 because we are looking at yet another development from a later era in Christianity, the concern with the image of Christianity in the larger community. The argument here is the exclusion of απιστοις, or non Christians, because tongues are a sign (σημειον) for the faithful (τοις πιστευουσιν). They are worried about the image to unsophisticated (unschooled or "idiots") and non-Christians who come to the assemblies (ιδιωται η απιστοι). This is a curious situation. We are definitely past the era of the house church, and into something much larger and more formal, such that it's large enough to draw in the curious passerby (note 14:24 contains ἐλέγχω, a rather rare word associated with the pastoral layers for reproving unsound thought and doctrine, this being the only occurrence in the ten letters of Paul besides two verse in Ephesians). Verse 14:25 has too many language problems to cover in a short post (three unusual words, four associated with the pastoral layer), but causing the unbelievers to fall down and worship God seems a bizarre reason to ban something. Unless that is the issue is hierarchical control of content.
Anyway, these verses simply highlight something rather prominent in verses not attested in the Marcionite version, strong emphasis on rank and order, and relations as large and very visible community with the outside non-Christian community. It concerns a church large enough to not have intimate control over all it's members. In short it's a church well past the initial founding days, possibly a couple generations past, where all sorts of organizational and interfaith concerns have moved to the surface. These could hardly be the concerns of an itinerant preacher founding small house churches and spreading the Gospel, which Paul was supposed to be.