By Ernest D. Burton.
The University of Chicago.
The City of Corinth, its antiquity, its characteristics in New Testament times.—The work of the apostle Paul in Corinth as told in his letters', as told in Acts.—Letters and Messages between Paul and the Corinthians in his absence from Corinth.—Occasion of 1 Cor.—Analysis of 1 Cor.—Apparent references to 1 Cor. in 2 Cor.—Change of situation in the interval between 1 Cor. and 2 Cor.—Summary of events in this interval.—Occasion of 2 Cor.—Analysis of 2 Cor. FIRST CORINTHIANS. History has left us no record of the first settlement made on the site of what in classical and New Testament times was known as Corinth. It was in the nature of the case that a city should very early be founded on the isthmus that joined the Peloponnesus to Attica and separated the Corinthian and Saronic Gulfs, and on that isthmus there could hardly be a more attractive spot for a city than at the foot of that remarkable rock citadel, afterward known as the Acrocorinthus, rising 2000 feet above the surrounding region. But the Corinth with which the reader of the New Testament has to do is not the Corinth of pre-historic or even of classical antiquity, but one which was in New Testament times a comparatively modern city. The Corinth of the Achaean League, of Thucydides and Xenophon, was destroyed by the Romans under Mummius in 146 B. C. A century, later, in 46 B. C., Julius Caesar rebuilt and repopulated it. It grew rapidly, and another century later—it was almost exactly one hundred years later when Paul first visited it—it had perhaps 100,000 inhabitants. Its population was heterogeneous, including, almost as a matter of course in that day, many Jews. It was a wealthy, and a highly cultivated city, though possibly both in wealth and cultivation inferior to the Corinth which Mummius destroyed. It was so infamous for its vice that a word meaning to practice licentiousness was coined from the name of the city. Today the only significant remnants of its former splendor are seven Doric columns, which once formed part of a temple. The modern city of Corinth is four miles distant on the Bay of Corinth.
The epistles of Paul, even apart
from the book of Acts, yield us
considerable information
concerning Paul's first visit to
Corinth. A comparison of Phil.
4:15; 1 Thess. 1:1; 2:2; 3:1,6; and 2
Cor. 11:9 enables us both to
reproduce the itinerary of
Paul's first journey through
Macedonia and Achaia, and to
recover a number of other
important facts concerning it.
We see that Paul visited
Philippi, Thessalonica, Athens,
and Corinth; that being left
alone at Athens while Timothy
(probably Silas also) returned
to Macedonia he was afterwards
rejoined at Corinth by these
helpers of his, Timothy coming
from Thessalonica, and he or
some one else—it seems probable
that it was Silas (1 Thess.
1:1)—bringing him a gift of money
from Philippi. With what anxiety
Paul awaited the return of
Timothy and with what emotions
he received the news from his
converts in Thessalonica, we
have already seen in his letter
to them written at this time (1
Thess.). But must there not have
been also a letter to the
Philippians at this time
thanking them for their gift? If
so it must be counted among the
many treasures now lost to us.
But the two letters to Corinth
which we have furnish us no
little information concerning
Paul's work in that city. That
he was the founder of the
church, he says plainly in 1 Cor.
3:6, io and 9:1, 2. That with
fear and trembling he preached
in Corinth the gospel of a
crucified Saviour with unadorned
simplicity and without attempt
to commend it by giving it the
appearance of a philosophy, he
declares 1 Cor. 2:1-5; cf. also
3: I, 2. He baptized but few of
his Corinthian converts, not
regarding this as a part of his
special work (1 Cor. 1:14-17).
He was supported while in
Corinth, not by his converts
there, but in part at least by
the gifts sent to him from
Philippi (Phil. 4:15; 2 Cor. 11:9).
All this we learn from the
existing letters of Paul. The
book of Acts tells in part the
same facts, and adds some others
of interest. Thus we learn that
Paul labored with his own hands
to support himself, that he
began his work in the Jewish
synagogue, but was constrained
at length to turn from the Jews
to the Gentiles, that he
remained in the city eighteen
months, and that before he left
he was at the instance of the
Jews brought before the
proconsul Gallio, who, however,
dismissed the case as having
nothing in it demanding his
attention. See Acts 18: 1-17.
There are several indications
that a considerable interval
elapsed between Paul's first
ministry in Corinth and the
writing of the letter which we
call First Corinthians. Yet this
interval was by no means one of
neglect of the church by the
apostle or of the suspense of
communication between him and
them. The letter which we
commonly call Second Corinthians
refers to the visit which the
apostle is then about to make to
Corinth as the third (2 Cor.
12:14; 13:1). This implies that
one visit had already been made
since the founding of the
church. Most scholars have
judged it impossible to find
place for this second visit
between our two letters, and
hence have held that it must
have taken place before First
Corinthians was written. First
Corinthians refers also to a
previous letter of the apostle
to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 5:
9). This letter is now lost. It
probably followed the visit
referred to above, since
otherwise the visit would have
furnished ample opportunity to
correct the misunderstanding of
its meaning. Still later members of
the household of Chloe brought
the apostle news of the state of
affairs at Corinth (1 Cor. 1:11). Stephanas, Fortunatus, and
Achaicus also visited him (1 Cor.
16: 17), and they or others
brought a letter from the
members of the church (7:1) to
the apostle. The letter which we
have from the apostle was
written from Ephesus (1 Cor.
16:19; 16:8,) but the apostle
was expecting before long to
leave there. The residence in
Ephesus thus referred to must
certainly be that recorded in
Acts chap. 19, and as that
lasted between two and three
years (Acts 19:8, 10; 20:31),
and was preceded by journeys
from Corinth to Jerusalem and
Antioch, and thence across Asia
Minor (Acts 18: 18-19:1), the
letter must have been written
about three years after Paul
left Corinth.
During all this
time the apostle had undoubtedly
borne the Corinthian Christians
upon his heart, and as we have
seen had several times had
communication with them, in
person, or by messenger, or by
letter from them or to them.
Just now there were several
matters which urgently called
for attention from him. The
members of the household of
Chloe had brought him news of
the existence in the church of
four parties. These parties
called themselves by the names
of Paul, of Apollos, of Peter,
and of Christ, though there is
no indication that any one of
the three Christian preachers
whose names were thus converted
into party-cries approved of
this use of their names. The
Apollos party seems to have been
made up of those who were
captivated with the preaching of
Apollos. Paul had studiously
abstained from catering to the
Corinthian love of philosophy,
and had set forth the simple, to
many repulsive, doctrine of a
crucified Christ. Apollos coming
after Paul (1 Cor. 3:6) had
preached, it would seem,
substantially the same doctrine,
but had adopted a different
method of presentation. Perhaps
quite as much because of the
cast of his own mind, as from a
desire to win the attention or
admiration of the Corinthians,
he had translated the gospel
into the terms of philosophy.
Such preaching always attracts a
certain class of minds-those who
have, or fancy they have, a
natural taste for philosophical
methods of statement. It
attracted some of the
Corinthians, and this gave rise
to the Apollos—party. The
Paul-party was probably composed
simply of those who stood by the
apostle, the founder of the
church and its first pastor. Of
the Peter-party we have no
definite information. The
Christ-party we shall have
occasion to speak of in
connection with Second
Corinthians. The references to
it in First Corinthians would
scarcely enable us to determine
its character at all.
But
other evils existed also in the
church of the Corinthians. The
vices of Corinth as well as its
philosophy affected the life of
the Christian community. One
conspicuous case of immorality,
surpassing in grossness even
that which prevailed among the
heathen, called for prompt
attention and stern rebuke (1 Cor. chap. 5). The spirit of
litigiousness prevailed too
among the brethren, leading them
to carry their quarrels into the
courts of law, where they must
of course be tried before
heathen tribunals, to the
disgrace of the new religion (6:1-11). Nor was the sinfulness
of unchastity quite clearly
recognized among the new
converts. The apostle's own
teaching that all things are
lawful had apparently been
turned into an excuse for sin,
and he is compelled to interpret
it, and to insist upon those
other complementary truths which
save it from becoming a
principle of immorality (6:12-20).
In the letter which the
Corinthians had written to the
apostle they had asked him
questions concerning marriage
(chap. 7). Probably also the
matters discussed in chaps.
8-14, things sacrificed to
idols, the customs of public
worship, spiritual gifts, were
suggested to him by their
letter. From some source unknown
to us the apostle had still
further learned that some among
the Corinthians were affected
with the Sadducean tendency and
denied the resurrection of the
dead.
It is evident that these
various matters furnish ample
occasion for this letter of the
apostle; and in the light of the
situation thus depicted, it
becomes intensely interesting
even at this day so long after
it was written. In the following
analysis the ten topics which
the letter discussed are grouped
according to what seems to be
the source of the apostle's
information, but are for
convenience numbered
consecutively in one series:
ANALYSIS.
SECOND
CORINTHIANS.
Our First
Corinthians is not a letter
which could be the last word of
the correspondence between the
apostle and the Corinthian
church. It called for an answer
of some sort. That answer would
naturally be awaited by the
apostle with no little anxiety.
Our Second Corinthians tells of
the great anxiety which he had
had after writing a certain
letter (2 Cor. 7:8), and
especially of the suspense with
which he had awaited news from
Corinth (2 Cor. 2:12, 13; 7:5),
and the great joy with which he
had at length received good news
(7:6 ff.). It is natural to infer at
once that the letter which for a
time he regretted having written
was our First Corinthians, and
that our Second Corinthians is
the next in the series,
expressing his joy on the
receipt of welcome tidings from
Corinth. This seems all the more
probable if we recall that First
Corinthians was written at
Ephesus when the apostle was
expecting before long to leave
there (1 Cor. 16:8) for
Macedonia and Corinth (16:5),
and then observe that when he
writes Second Corinthians he has
arrived in Macedonia (2 Cor.
7:5), having come thither via
Troas, evidently from some point
further south, and is on his way
to Corinth (2 Cor. 14:12; 13:1). The journey which in
Second Corinthians is in
progress is precisely the one
which in First Corinthians was
contemplated.
But there are
other facts about Second
Corinthians which suggest that
there has been more intervening
history than this simple
explanation of the relation
between the letters would imply.
Thus the first letter speaks of
Timothy as about to come to
Corinth, though his arrival
there is not regarded as quite
certain (1 Cor. 4: 17; 16:10).
When the second letter is
written, Timothy is with the
apostle again (2 Cor. 1:1), but
there is no reference to any
news brought by him: either he
has not been in Corinth or the
situation has so changed as not
to call for any reference to
him. Titus, who is not mentioned
at all in the first letter, has
just made a visit to Corinth,
and the apostle has been
anxiously waiting his return (2
Cor. 2:12, 13; 7:5). The
references to the letter of the
apostle to which Titus was
apparently to bring an answer do
not, on second consideration,
seem perfectly to fit our First
Corinthians. The letter to which
Second Corinthians refers seems
to have been severe against the
church as such (2 Cor. 2:1-4;
7:8-11). But this can hardly be
said of the first letter.
Especially does it seem
difficult to suppose that what
the apostle says in this second
letter about the individual
offender applied to the offender
spoken of in the first letter (1 Cor. chap. 5). Second
Corinthians speaks of one who
had evidently committed some
offense against the apostle
personally, and against the
church only in the fact of the
offense against the apostle (2
Cor. 2:5-11; 7:11 12). But
the offense of the wrong-doer
spoken of in the first letter,
could scarcely by any straining
of language be thus described.
His sin was against an
individual, against the church,
and against God, but only in a
very indirect sense against the
apostle.
It must be observed
also that the situation in
respect to the parties has
greatly changed in the interval
between the two letters that we
now have.
In the first letter we read of
four parties, though the apostle
has little to say directly
concerning any but the Apollos-party
and the one which bore his own
name. But in the second letter
there are apparently but two
parties, and it seems to be the
Christ-party that is most
bitterly opposing the apostle (2
Cor. 10:7; 11:23).
These
considerations have led to the
supposition that there was
communication both ways between
the apostle and the church in
the interval between our First
Corinthians and our Second
Corinthians. The history may be
reconstructed somewhat as
follows: Our First Corinthians
was taken to Corinth, but failed
to accomplish its whole purpose.
In some way, perhaps because the
incestuous man was offended at
the apostle's rebuke of him and
succeeded in gathering a party
around him which was able to
control the action of the church
for a time, perhaps because the
leaders of the Christ-party took
offense at even the mild and
indirect reproof of them, and
possibly gathered to themselves
some of the members of the Apollos and Peter parties,—for
some reason which we cannot
state with positiveness,—the
church virtually rebelled
against the apostle. In
connection with the discussion
of the matter one man made
himself conspicuous by his
opposition to the apostle,
apparently openly insulting and
defying him. News of this was
carried back to the apostle,
perhaps by Timothy, who if he
came to Corinth was unable to
carry the case for Paul. When
this sad news reached the
apostle, he wrote another
letter, more severe than the
former, and with it sent Titus
that he might, if possible, by
personal entreaty and argument
persuade the church to adopt the
course which the apostle
enjoined. This letter—on this
view the third which we know of
the apostle's writing to the
Corinthians—is the one referred
to in our Second Corinthians
(which might therefore be
designated as Fourth
Corinthians). The mission of
Titus required a longer time
than Paul had anticipated. It
had been arranged that Titus
should come to Troas, evidently
by way of Macedonia. The apostle
went thither from Ephesus, but
being unable to compose himself
to work there because of his
distress of mind about the
Corinthians he went on to
Macedonia, hoping there to find
Titus. Again he was
disappointed, and his anxiety
increased. At length, however,
Titus arrived, bringing the
long-desired report of affairs
at Corinth. On the main
question, and with the majority
of the church, the efforts of
Titus re-enforcing the letters
had been successful. The church
had repudiated the action of the
leader of the opposition to the
apostle, and had inflicted a
punishment so severe that the
apostle was constrained, now
that the essential point was gained in
securing the renewed allegiance
of the church, to turn and beg
them to have mercy on the
offender (2:5-11; 7:9-12). But
the news of Titus was by no
means wholly of a reassuring
character. On the one side the
church, though returning to
their loyalty to the apostle,
were still offended at his
failure to keep his promises in
the matter of visiting them (1:15-23). On the other hand, it is
evident that there still
remained at Corinth a party who
were bitterly opposed to Paul,
ridiculed him, and denied
altogether his claim to be an
apostle (chaps. 10 and 11).
These opponents of the apostle
evidently claimed to be Christ's
in a sense in which he was not
such (10:7; 11:23). It seems
clear also that they claimed to
be themselves apostles (11:5,
13; 12:11). This is, then, in
all probability the Christ-party
referred to briefly in First
Corinthians (1:12, cf. also 3:22). And, indeed, in the light
of these references to this
party in the later letter, we
are able to see that the defense
of himself which the apostle
introduced incidentally into his
former letter as an illustration
of the principle of waiving
rights for the sake of love (1 Cor. chap. 9), had a real and
vital interest of its own, and
was in fact a defense of himself
against the Christ-party. In
respect, then, to the opposition
from this party, matters have
not at all mended since First
Corinthians was written. It must
be noticed, indeed, that this
party was, as respects its
leaders at least, composed not
of members of the Corinthian
church, but of those who claimed
a special relationship to Jesus,
hence, in all probability,
Jewish Christians from
Palestine, who had seen Christ
in the flesh. Yet they must have
gained some following in
Corinth, or the apostle would
have had no need to make so
extended a reply to them.
Such
is the situation which gives
rise to the fourth of the
letters which we have reason to
believe that Paul wrote to the
Corinthians, our Second
Corinthians, so-called. The news
that Titus brings gives the
apostle occasion for the
expression of his joy that the
church has at length renewed its
allegiance to him, and calls
also for an explanation of his
seeming vacillation in reference
to the visit to them, and for a
vigorous defense of himself
against his opponents, the
members of the Christ-faction.
He employs the opportunity also
to urge the completion of the
offering for the saints at
Jerusalem.
The letter stands in
one respect in sharp contrast
with First Corinthians. That is
simple and clear in its
structure. This is broken,
involved, full of digressions.
Some scholars have held, indeed,
that it is not one letter, but a
combination of several letters
of the apostle to this
Corinthian church. Nor is it
indeed impossible that there are
passages of the letter, as we
now have it, which are in
reality fragments of some of the
lost letters of the apostle to
the Corinthians. Perhaps the
most probable instance of this
is in 6:14-7:1, a passage which
seems to have little connection
with what precedes or what
follows, and the removal of
which certainly leaves the
course of thought more clear and
straightforward. The remainder
of the letter, however, despite
its somewhat tortuous course of
thought, seems quite explicable
as a single letter written under
considerable stress of feeling
and of conflicting emotions. Its
plan seems to be as follows:
ANALYSIS.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||