Religious Studies 436 
Instructor: Dr. R. Kraft
Reporter: Christine Boulos
Minutes: 03/03/97
 
* Doc Bob's interested in learning what particular book each of us will be
reviewing and giving a 5 minute oral report on in class and also a general
idea of what our paper topic is -- so get that info. to him as soon as you
can! 
 
* We jumped right into Chapter 7 of 1 Corinthians, which seems to be part
of a series of answers Paul is giving in response to questions he received
either directly from Corinth or from someone who had recently been there
(Titus?).
 
* Breaking Chapter 7 roughly into three sections, Paul addresses the 
unmarried, married, and the rest; whereby he demonstrates what he 
believes to be the law while making the distinction between what is 
coming from him and what is according to "the Lord" (Joshua/Jesus).
 
* In terms of "having his own wife": it is not clear what constituted
"marriage" in that situation -- it might mean something as "informal" as
cohabitation or a legal status recognized by the civil authorities in
Corinth or something inbetween. 
 
* To the married, the answer to the question from Corinth seems to be that
there are mutual rights between a man and his wife and that this should
not be interrupted without consent so that they are not in danger of
running into trouble with Satan. 
 
* 1 Cor 7.8 -- Paul turns to the unmarried which is a term that is not
gender specific so may be used as a general term or may apply only to
males. Also, the term "widows" could apply to women who have lost their
husbands or to a formal group called "widows" in the church. Paul urges
both the unmarried and the widows to remain "as I am," where we are left
wondering about the formal status of Paul (he might be "married" but
separated, for example). Nonetheless, the concession is given that if they
are not able to remain as he is that they are permitted to marry. 
 
* Upon turning to a more general framework, Paul argues the rule of
maintaining the status quo, which he demonstrates by discussing the point
of circumcision. There is ample evidence that some circumcised people in
that world (Jewish, Egyptian, etc.) underwent medical operations to
"remove the marks of circumcision" for various reasons; Paul seems to know
of this possibility.  Paul is arguing here that whether you came into the
community circumcised or uncircumcised, don't take pains to change things,
but focus your energies on what is important in these end times.
 
* The issue of the "virgin" in 1 Cor 7.25 may be related to a problem that
seems to be evident with the use of the term for the Greek translator of
the book of Isaiah, who uses the term "virgin" (parthenos) to translate
the Hebrew "young woman" -- a quite understandable decision at that stage
of the development of the Greek term. By the time that the author of the
gospel of Matthew uses this Isaiah passage with reference to the birth of
Joshua/Jesus, the term "virgin" has come to mean especially a young woman
who has not heterosexual sex. Additional confusion over the term virgin
may stem from the fact that in Greek it is has a masculine grammatical
form (and is sometimes used to refer to males) and Paul in 1 Corinthians
uses the plural form, therefore leaving the reader wondering if he means
to use it in a generic sense as unmarried (man or woman) or just
pertaining to females where the context is ambiguous.
 
* 1 Corinth 7.29 presents the eschatological basis of Paul's argument,
that the end is imminent. Paul is arguing for the status quo as the
strategy to permit everyone to focus on what is needed in the end times.
 
* There exists some evidence that may imply that Paul was married: 
Philippians 4.2, 1 Corinthians 9.5, Acts (where it is hinted that Paul may
have been a member of the Sanhedrin, and thus would have had to be over 35
years of age and married, if later rabbinic traditions are to be trusted).
Such references were used by Clement of Alexandria who includes Paul among
the married earliest Christian leaders.
 
* 1 Cor 7.36 -- the term marry or partner may imply a state of
betrothment, which prohibits sex with other people and where the
representatives of each involved party have signed a contract pertaining
to the marriage agreement.
 
* 1 Cor 11.5 implies that women did prophesy in that community. Some
scholars think that the apparently contradictory section in 1 Cor
14.33b-35 may not have been written by Paul (it was added later, or may
have been taken over by Paul from an earlier set of rules), maintaining
that Paul allows women prophesying. Some other early Christian authors
seem to have been afraid that some prophesying women were being perceived
in the category of sibyls, and thus introduced constraints upon women
prophesying. 
 
* A bit on the biography of Paul: The general consensus is that Paul was
beheaded in the period 64-68, a time frame that is sometimes pushed as
late as possible in order to include Paul's possible travels to Spain and
the circumstances alluded to in the pastoral epistles. We are not certain
that Paul actually ever arrived in Spain (Romans 15.24 tells of his plans
to go to Spain). The strong tradition that Paul was beheaded may provide a
clue as to Paul's legal status, since a Roman citizen would not have been
crucified. Paul was convicted of a capital crime, perhaps related to the
fire in Rome (although Christian sources tend to be silent about this
connection) that was utilized by Nero as a reason to attack the Christians
according to the 2nd century Roman historians Tacitus and Suetonius. 
The Acts of Paul, for example, gives other reasons for Nero attacking
Paul and the Christians.
 
* Johannes Munck wrote a book in the late 1950s in German, translated
<t>Paul and the Salvation of Mankind</>. To Munck, Paul understands
himself as sort of a supplementary messiah, a special missionary to the
Gentiles proclaiming the gospel message.  Once Paul has reached (at least
representatively) the ends of the (Roman)  earth, the "times of the
Gentiles" would be fulfilled and the expected end would come.  Thus it was
crucial for Paul to travel at least to Rome, if not to Spain.  The
earliest relevant evidence for how far Paul actually went comes from an
ambiguous pasage in 1 Clement 5, which states that Paul reached "the
limits of the west" and then was killed/martyred. This may imply that Paul
did reach Spain, or simply that he reached what was considered to be the
most important western location, Rome. A passage in the Acts of Peter
indicates that Paul leaves for Spain upon receiving a vision in a prison
in Rome. It is in the same vision that Paul is told that he will be
"perfected" in Rome under Nero, therefore, Paul must return to Rome and be
killed there after he goes to Spain. The information regarding Paul
wanting and actually going to Spain is indicative of the divided opinion
that exists as late as the 4rd century with Eusebius, who does not mention
the Spain tradition.

//end//