Talk:First Epistle to the Corinthians

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is supported by WikiProject Bible, an attempt to promote the creation, maintainance, and improvement of articles dealing with the Bible. Please participate by editing this article, or visit the project page for more details on the projects. Guidelines: Manual of Style - Naming conventions
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

Christianity Portal First Epistle to the Corinthians is part of the WikiProject Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familier with the guidelines.

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

The four-part division is arbitrary and interferes with discussing the actual content. --Wetman 22:14, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

The textual criticism is questionable. The comment that most scholars don't attribute Timothy 1 and 2 to Paul is misleading. An appeal to "most scholars" is not verifyable. Many New Testament scholars (including Ben Witherington III) argue for authorship from within Paul's inner circle of associates (that is on Paul's behalf and with Paul's direction). Other scholars attribute the text directly to Paul's hand. Either way, it is clear that there is not unanimity among scholars.

[edit] Outline cleanup

Since the previous outline was so bad, I started from scratch. Here's the original stuff if someone wants to reintroduce it. --JBJ830726 23:00, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

1. The apostle deals with the subject of the lamentable divisions and party strifes that had arisen among them (chs. 1–4).
2. He next treats of a case of incest that had become notorious among them, and of members of the church who had sued one another, to be judged in a court of law rather than before the saints of the Christian community, and of fornication (chs. 5–6).
3. In the third part, he discusses various questions of doctrine and Christian ethics, in reply to certain communications they had made to him. Paul discusses marriage and the preferable state of continence, the irrelevance of circumcision, the eating of meats that have been offered to an idol, the necessities of a woman covering her head and a man uncovering his, and other particular matters. Chapter 9 is a self-defense. Among other things this section is the most thorough discussion of spiritual gifts, including prophecy and glossolalia, in the entire New Testament. Paul does not condemn them but urges their orderly use, and also contrasts them with the higher spiritual gifts of faith, hope and love. Paul also rectifies certain flagrant abuses regarding the celebration of the Eucharist (chs. 7–14).

The verses 14:33-34 deal with the role and behavior of women in the church, that women are to keep silent, and are regarded by some to be an interpolation written by someone other than Paul. Some believe that the topic of line 33, of prophesying, appears to be disrupted by the dialogue concerning women, only to be picked up again at line 14:36. Further, these restrictions against women's authority mirror the language and tone of similar restrictions in First Timothy, which is considered by most scholars to be of non-Pauline origin.

1. The concluding part (chs. 15–16) contains an elaborate defense of the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, which had been called into question by some among them, followed by some general instructions, intimations, and greetings.

[edit] Bible Translation

Is there any possibility of using a more scholarly, inclusive language and modern Bible source? The KJV/AV Bible is hardly a suitable source for serious Theological study

[edit] Role of Women in the church

I'd like to see the information about verses 14:33-34 (the role and behavior of women in the church) incorporated in the article. I don't have online references but I listened to a lecture series on CD ("The New Testament," by Bart Ehrman, ISBN 1-56585-366-0) where he relates the same information as in the original outline. He also says that it comes after verse 40 in some manuscripts and that it may have originally been a margin note that a scribe somewhere along the way added to the text.

[edit] Proverb

1 Corinthians 9:22 reads, "To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, that I may by all means save some."

St. Paul's above explanation of his philosophy for winning converts has since acquired a pejorative connotation: today it is more often said that trying to be "all things to all men" is not desirable.[*"All things to all men" at phrases.org]

Moved to discussion because it does not seem appropriate for the page. Interpretation of the Bible is not a purpose that a encyclopedia should serve.~

[edit] Weasel-words tag

I'm on a mission to bring down the weasel-words tag! All we have to do is change a few sentances so that it would make sense to someone of any faith. For example, "Paul argued against their erroneous beliefs" would only make sense from a Christian viewpoint. "Paul considered their beliefs un-Christian and argued strongly against them" is more NPOV, and still conveys the same meaning. As a test, maybe some non-Christian readers out there could read this article and give us their feedback. Anyone? --Glistenray 02:49, 2 April 2007 (UTC)