Iskander

1 cor 15. 1. Now I make known to you. He now enters on another subject — the resurrection — the belief of which among the Corinthians had been shaken by some wicked persons

archibald

That has been summarized here in this thread in more than one way, as I recall, so rather than pick one 'Corinthians theme', I need to ask you what you see it as and then 'remind' me why v3-11 is not logical.

But, you've already done that, so I don't (yet) see where you're going with it again.

archibald

Ok, I'll make a guess:

The need to have faith in the resurrection.

And? That somehow excludes mentioning his own vision?

TedM

Spin, in your parsed passage Paul says that he is going to remind/inform them of the gospel they originally believed and then he doesn't do so. but then he asks a question that simply doesn't follow:

In your interpolated passage He in essence says: I remind you of the gospel: I preached it to you, you received it, you stand by it, you are saved by it. If you hold fast and persevere in it your faith will not be in vain...so how can it be that some are questioning the resurrection?

Where, spin, is the justification for asking such a question? Simply that they had been originally believed? What sense does that make? Wouldn't it make more sense for Paul to re-state his original message regarding the resurrection -- to actually remind them of WHY they believed?

So, we have two reasons why it would make sense to have re-stated his original message of resurrection:

1. He says he is reminding them of the gospel
2. He questions how they can not believe in resurrection.

It doesn't flow right since he appears to be reminding them of something without reminding them of it, and then he references the problem which threatens their belief without reminding them of WHY they originally believed. Verses 3-11 address both issues and join verses 2 and 12 in a way that improves the passage.


Paul already says in 15:

He references multiple testimonies to the resurrection of Christ, in contradiction to your parsed passage where Paul seems to be talking only about his own testimony, which ties back nicely to the list of witnesses in 3-7. What more do you want from Paul?

I remind you that Paul primarily was addressing the issue of how the humans can be raised, and not how or whether Christ was raised. I stated earlier that the Corinthians still believed in Christ's resurrection so other than to make his logical point--"well if you don't believe that man is resurrected, you can't even logically believe our testimony regarding Christs appearances", Paul's focus was on how man could be resurrected. He then moves on to other types of arguments about HOW a man's body could be resurrected. There is no need to repeat himself.

Ted

DCHindley

I fiddled with BibleWorks and an Interlinear translation before starting work. Now that I can take a break for a few minutes, let me pass this on:

15:1 Γνωρίζω (I am making known) δὲ (but) ὑμῖν (to you), ἀδελφοί (brothers), τὸ (the) εὐαγγέλιον (good news) ὃ (which) εὐηγγελισάμην (I declared as good news) ὑμῖν (to you), ὃ (which) καὶ (also) παρελάβετε (you received alongside), ἐν (in) ᾧ (which) καὶ (also) ἑστήκατε (you have stood), 2 δι᾽ (through) οὗ (which) καὶ (also) σῴζεσθε (you are being saved), τίνι (to what) λόγῳ (word/reason) εὐηγγελισάμην (I declared as good news) ὑμῖν (to you) εἰ (if) κατέχετε (you are holding down), ἐκτὸς (outside) εἰ (if) μὴ (not) εἰκῇ (in vain) ἐπιστεύσατε (you believed).

That roughly translates (in my oh-so-wrong and highly-speculative POV) as:

15:1 But I am making known to you the good news [that faithful gentiles can inherit the promise land along with native born Jews]
Which I declared to you [previously] as good news
Which also you received [at that time]
And in which you have stood fast [until now, that is]
2 And through which you are being saved [from God’s wrath on the heathen on the future Day of the LORD]

Regarding the reasoning I declared to you as good news [that you too can inherit the promises made to Abraham by God solely on the basis of your faith in them, just as Abraham was justified by his faith before he was circumcised]
If you [now] hold down [reasoning] outside [of that reasoning I declared to you, that all believers in the promises will be resurrected to participate in the future fulfillment of the promises, and now hold that there is no resurrection]
Then have you not believed in vain [that you too will participate in God’s promises]?

DCH - back to work

archibald

And as spin pointed out, he states the resurrection as a fact in v20.

Not very convincing unless he's given some reason why.

It's as if we're being asked to think that when Paul evangelizes, he tells doubters they have to have 'pure faith without any evidence at all'.

And doesn't mention his own reasons.

avi

Thank you very much, Andrew, as Stephan noted, yesterday, your contributions to the forum are always welcome, instructive, and essential for all of us, particularly those of us with less experience in the subject matter.

Even if every single one of your posts is not necessarily acknowledged, I am certain that 98% of the forum members read everything you write, religiously. Well done.

thank you.

avi

TedM

Yes, thanks Andrew. What a great resource. Everyone here can benefit from it.

Solo

But the passage does not say Paul was not "in Christ". That is your interpretation - which indeed is too hard to follow.
But I was not quoting, Ted. I said above in post #6908842 (quoting myself, not Paul): ".. all the hard work of Paul still does not raise him above the lowest rang in the apostolic hierarchy". So, there is nothing to correct. I suggested that such a view of Paul was hostile. It places him not just below Cephas and the Twelve, but "all the apostles". You found nothing of substance to contradict that.


I take your "he might not say" is a blushing admission that "he was unlikely to say" [that]. And given ch 9 (which, you are right, is one consideration) you allow there is a probability - lets not quibble about how high- that at least part of the "block" was interpolated. I call that progress.

Best,
Jiri

spin

He does not say he is going to remind them of the gospel he proclaimed. He says that he is reminding them. That does not imply that he needs to repeat himself. It is however necessary that they recall it.

Let me remind you of your faith. Hanging out with evil atheists might make you question it.

I was doing my civic duty, but do you think I have to explain what your faith is? You are not being at all reasonable in my eyes. You can't just throw up some abuse of language that even you wouldn't adhere to in reality.

Let me remind you of your marriage vows. You shouldn't be in that strip joint.

You've given the impression you've forgotten them. I just need to remind you, not rehearse them.

But, let's assume for a moment your desire reflects Paul and that the witnesses were included by Paul. There is still no rehearsal of the gospel in the resurrection reports, no actual representation of the gospel, so beside the fact that your linguistics isn't functional, your interpretation doesn't work either.