PAUL AND THE RHETORIC OF REVERSAL: KERYGMATIC ...

Wird hier eine inhaltliche Beziehung zur Opferfrage sichtbar, die mehr ist als
blosse Stichwortassoziation? 1 Kor 9 kann ja statt vom Apostel, von einem
späteren Redaktor in seine jetzige Position gebracht worden sein!
Literarkritische Quellenscheidung ist anscheinend auch hier die gebotene
Lösung. 149
Oropeza sees chapter 9 as having an exemplary role:
Yeo objects:
In chapter 9, then, Paul uses himself as an example to convince the strong that
they should also exercise self-control by refraining from their right to eat at the
expense of the conscience of the weak. 150
Paul’s apostolic defense in chapter 9 is clearly not just an exemplum for the
church; it is an apologia (“defense,” 9:3) of Paul’s apostleship, as Paul himself
puts it. 151
Similarly, Schmithals objects that, although chapter 9 may be seen to provide an example
of self-restraint of freedom, this theme is not really made evident in 9:1-18 itself. The
passage itself, he claims, is just about Paul’s self-defence in response to criticisms, and
does not express itself as simply an example, in the service of some other main point. It is
only the contextual placement of this section that makes it appear to be an “example”. 152
There is a certain circularity to this argument: chapter 9 does not belong in its context
because it is actually independent; its independence, however, can only be demonstrated
149
Probst, Paulus und der Brief, 5.
150
Oropeza, Paul and Apostasy, 58-59. Robinson Butarbutar likewise states, “we submit
that chapter 9 is primarily an example”. Robinson Butarbutar, Paul and Conflict
Resolution: An Exegetical Study of Paul’s Apostolic Paradigm in 1 Corinthians 9 (Milton
Keynes: Paternoster, 2007), 88.
151
Yeo, Rhetorical Interaction, 76.
152
Schmithals, “Korintherbriefe,” 270.
116