PAUL AND THE RHETORIC OF REVERSAL: KERYGMATIC ...

5. The Situation Behind 1 Corinthians 15
Throughout this dissertation I have contended that socio-historical and pastoral-theological
perspectives on 1 Corinthians may be viewed as complementary. It is therefore worth
considering whether this reading of the pastorally-driven rhetorical function of the resurrection
discussion fits with a conceivable historical reconstruction of the situation in Roman Corinth. 74
It has been demonstrated above that no one of the interpretative groupings identified by
Thiselton provides a comprehensively satisfactory reconstruction. 75 It may be that elements of
the different views make up a coherent scenario. In particular, I find two such elements
worthy of further consideration: disregard for the body and disregard for the dead.
Disregard for the Body
It will be useful, firstly, to demonstrate that Jewish, Greek and Roman literary sources all
evidence significant variation in conceptions of corporeality and the afterlife.
Although Plato certainly held to the immortality of the soul (as opposed to the body), it seems
noteworthy that the two main Greek philosophical schools of Paul’s time – the Epicureans 76
and the Stoics 77 (whom, according to Acts 17, Paul had addressed in Athens prior to arriving in
Corinth) both believed in the mortality of the soul.
74 De Boer argues that an ability to pinpoint the precise nature of the situation is unnecessary
because the chapter consists of “a case for the resurrection of the dead, not a case against a
presumed alternative”. There is certainly an extent to which this is true; however if our
interpretation cannot be squared with any likely historical reconstruction, the interpretation
itself may justifiably be called into question. Therefore an investigation into possible
historical backgrounds is not out of place. See Martinus de Boer, “The Deniers of the
Resurrection and Their Social Status,” in Saint Paul and Corinth: 1950 Years Since the
Writing of the Epistles to the Corinthians (ed. Constantine J. Belezos; Athens: Psychogios
Publications, 2009), 329-345; 345.
75 Thiselton himself notices this and suggests a combination of views two and three.
76 Tomlin argues that “there are good reasons for thinking that this [that is, the widespread
influence of Epicureanism] was especially so in Corinth.” Tomlin, “Christians and
Epicureans,” 55.
77 Albert V. Garcilazo argues that higher-status members of the Corinthian church were
influenced by the cosmology, anthropology, and ethics of the Roman Stoa, resulting in a
290