You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Corinth’ tag.

The city of Corinth was an important cosmopolitan city in the middle part of the first century. (Was Corinth more sinful than other Roman cities? Click the link for my comments about that longstanding misunderstanding of history, as well as a followup comment from a read.) It was economically stable, attracting a wide range of businesses from all over the Empire. Paul established the church in this city for this very reason. Once Christianity takes hold in Corinth, the local churches themselves can continue the mission of spreading the gospel throughout the region.

In choosing as one of his main missionary centers a city in which only the tough were reputed to survive, Paul demonstrated a confidence oddly at variance with his protestations of weakness. Corinth, however, offered advantages that outweighed its dangers. In addition to excellent communications, the extraordinary number of visitors (Dio Chrysostom, Or. 37.8; Aelius Aristides, Or. 46.24) created the possibility of converts who would carry the gospel back to their homelands. In contrast to the closed complacency of Athens, Corinth was open and questioning, eager for new ideas but neither docile nor passive, as Paul’s relationship with the Christian community there amply documents (Murphy-O’Connor, ABD 1:1138).

Yet of all of Paul’s churches, this one seems to have had the most difficulties assimilating Christianity and their culture.

CorinthThe books of 1 and 2 Corinthians deal with a number of problems that arose after Paul left the city.  Why did Paul not deal with them as a part of his regular training of new believers and church leaders?  What happened in Corinth that brought these particular problems to the forefront only after Paul left the city?

The thesis of Bruce Winter’s After Paul Left Corinth is that after Paul left the city the church began to explore how Christianity interacted with their Greco-Roman culture and social relationships.  Their culture was a thoroughly Roman world-view, but it was also a world-view in flux.

There were several de-stabilizing factors in first century Corinth.

First, the institution of yearly festivals in the imperial cult.  Participation in these festivals was something a Roman citizen would have associated with loyalty to Rome, a loyalty that the citizens of Corinth took very seriously.

Second, the Isthmian Games were based in Corinth, and there is evidence that when the games were celebrated the President of the games hosted a festival for Corinthians who were Roman citizens.  In 8:9 there is a reference to having the “freedom” to eat; the Greek word is “authority,” or perhaps “right” to eat.  Paul may be referring to these sort of elite social connections that some in the church had the right/freedom to participate in.  Can a Christian really participate in this meal as a follower of Christ?

Third, Winter cites evidence that there were three severe grain famines in the first century that effected Corinth.  There are ten inscriptions from Paul’s time that honor the “superintendent of the grain.”  This office had the power to manage grain sales in an effort to keep prices down and supply flowing.  This could involve a taxation system that paid for grain for the poor, or even a flooding of the market with grain in order to drive prices down.  Even rumors of famine were enough to cause riots and generally de-stabilize an economy.

Last, the most difficult issues revolved around Roman cultural and social practices.  In 1 Cor 3:3 Paul says that the church is “still worldly,” literally that they are thinking like the people of Corinth, not the people of God. The Christians in Corinth failed to see how the Roman world impacted their life in Christ.

Does this cultural background help us understand “what happened” in Corinth? Why did the church mis-handle so many of the challenges to their new faith in Christ?  Is the Corinthian experience much different than Christianity in the modern West?

Bibliography: Bruce Winter, After Paul Left Corinth: The Influence of Secular Ethics and Social Change (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2001).

After several very difficult experiences in Philippi and Thessalonica and an unfruitful visit to Athens, Paul finally experiences some good success in Corinth. After preaching in the synagogue he establishes a church that includes several key converts. Luke lists Titius Justus, a god-fearing Gentile and Crispus, the leader of the synagogue.  Both of these were leaders in the synagogue and would have been valuable to Paul as leaders in a new church. A third convert is implied in Romans 16:23 – Erastus, the “director of public works” (NIV) or city treasurer. If Erastus was a convert at this time he would have brought some wealth and prestige to the church. In addition to these converts, Aquilla and Priscilla were in Corinth and eventually the teacher Apollos

art-thou-jealous-muchPaul may have been concerned his success would breed a violent back-lash from the synagogue, as it had in Thessalonica. In fact, Paul has seen this happen before.  The normal pattern is for him to enter the synagogue and face serious persecution.  He is not afraid for his own life, in fact, he seems more than willing to suffer physically for the Gospel.

1 Cor 2:3-4 indicates that Paul was afraid his ministry was destined for failure.  He does not yet know of the fate of the Thessalonican believers, perhaps even Berea is unknown to him.  Athens likely did not result in a church.  Will Corinth go just as badly?  Yet in 1 Cor 2, Paul claims that any success in Corinth was based solely on the power of the Holy Spirit, not his own rhetorical ability.

In Acts 18:9-10 Luke tells us that Paul has a vision in which the Lord tells Paul that he will not be harmed in the city of Corinth and that there are many people in the city that are “the Lord’s.”  There are three short, related commands: Do not fear, continue to speak, and do not be silent.

If these commands reflect Paul’s mood prior to Silas and Timothy’s return, then it is possible that Paul considered, like Jeremiah before him, to remain silent and not open himself up to further persecution (Jer 20:7-12).  But like Jeremiah, Paul cannot keep the Gospel to himself, he must be what he is, the light to the Gentiles.  Even if this means he will be persecuted.  This vision encourages him to continue, since his Gospel message will be received in Corinth. He will remain in the city 18 months, Paul’s longest place of ministry since his commission from Antioch in Acts 13.

An important observation here is Paul’s success was met with increased jealousy and persecution. Paul was obedient to his calling yet he was still suffering. Why is this? To what extent is Luke describing a successful ministry as a persecuted ministry? Compared to what some modern Christians seem to think, this is the opposite of what to expect. Yet for Paul, suffering confirmed he was doing exactly what God called him to do.

Nero as Priest

William M. Ramsay on cites Dio Chrysostom to the effect that the custom of women going veiled in Tarsus was an oriental and non-Greek custom, Paul is merely reflecting his own (Jewish) background by requiring women wear head coverings (The Cities of St. Paul, 201-5).  Because of the popularity of Ramsey’s works on Paul, this theory is often repeated in modern commentaries, but it seems odd that Paul would impose this one Jewish custom on congregations when he frees them from so many other Jewish customs.

The application of this rather obscure command is usually some vague platitude that women should be dressed modestly.  If the culture includes head coverings in this then the woman ought to not offend the culture.  No one ever points out that if this is the true application, then a woman visiting a culture which is comfortable with public nudity is free to “fit right in” when they visit the beach!

I seriously doubt that modesty is the issue Paul is trying to get at in 1 Corinthians 11.  There is clear evidence in the Greco-Roman world of prostitutes wearing head coverings.  There are several artistic representations of groups of women with or without head coverings.  There is simply no evidence that head coverings were universal in the Greco-Roman world!

Based on his study of Roman statues, D. W. J. Gill has argued that it was a Roman convention to cover the head while praying or offering a libation. There are two well-known statues from Corinth, one of Nero and one of Augustus with their heads veiled. It was the leader of a prayer or sacrifice that would cover their heads, the congregation (if any) would not necessarily do so. Gill argues that the social elite in Corinth also practiced head covering while praying or participating in a sacrifice. Since the passage in 1 Cor 11 seems to cover the whole congregation, perhaps it is only the prophets who are speaking in the congregation that are covering their heads while prophesying (in 14:29 only two or three ought prophesy).

The problem in Corinth is that the Christians are (continuing) to take their cues for worship from the pagan world.  They are worshiping in the same way that they would have in a pagan rite, Paul is rejecting this mixing of the world with the Church.

If the problem that is at the heart of the veiling of men / unveiling of women is taking worship cues from the pagan world, then there is a most serious application possible.  How far we want to take this application is quite controversial, from the mega-church movement to modern praise and worship services, it is possible that the American church has taken its cues from the pagan world rather than from the Bible.  The modern American church seems to be following MTV rather than the NIV.

There is always a tension between cultural relevancy for the sake of evangelism and participating in the world because we enjoy it.  It is possible that is what was happening in Corinth.  The members of the church of Corinth were routinely acting like the world without taking into consideration how their new Christian world view speaks to a practice (sexual mores, lawsuits, feasts and banquets at temples, etc.)

The veiling of women / men may seem like a minor problem to use (“it’s just cultural”) but that misses the whole point.  If these people were indistinguishable from the world in their worship, how were they going to effectively evangelize their culture?

Bibliography:

D. W. J. Gill, “The Importance of Roman Portraiture for Head-coverings in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16,” Tyndale Bulletin 41 (1990): 246-60.
C. T. Thompson, “Hairstyles, Headcoverings, and St. Paul: Portraits from Roman Corinth” BA (1988): 99-115.

It is well known that the church at Corinth had “divisions” over leadership.  Some considering Paul their authority, other Apollos, others Peter, and still others accepted only Jesus as their authority.  It is possible that these divisions represent competing house churches, some founded by Paul, some by Apollos.  But even if there are multiple house churches founded by different leaders, Paul passionately argues that the body of Christ cannot be divided in this way.  In fact, these divisions are a sign of worldliness.  How can the presence of “divisions” be described as “worldly?”

Cover of

Cover via Amazon

Bruce Winter details the Greco-Roman practice of discipleship in the second chapter of After Paul Left Corinth. He finds that there is a great deal of parallels between the disciple-teacher relationship in the culture of Corinth and the problem of divisions in the church over the authority of teachers. Dio Chrysostom visited Corinth about A.D. 89-96.  He described the activities of the disciples of the Sophists – the professional orators who were able to command large audiences, high fees for educating youth, and often a great deal of power within the city.   There was extreme competition among the orators for honor and power.  The better the orator, the higher the fee, and the more disciples he will attract.  Dio Chrysostom complained that Corinth was filled with “wretched” sophists, many of whom were debating one another with “shouting and abuse” near the temple to Poseidon.  (I suppose that if Dio were commenting on the modern world, he would describe the “wretched bloggers” shouting abuse at the temple of WordPress…!)

Paul enters this world of “wretched Sophists” and preaches the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  He gathers disciples and establishes a church, a meeting place for educating his disciples.  He begins the process of developing them into leaders who will also preach the gospel and found more churches. The Gentiles coming into this new Church do not seem to be able to see the differences between it and a Greco-Roman philosopher gathering disciples and educating them in a particular philosophy.

In 1 Corinthians, Paul consciously avoids disciple-teacher language.  Paul did not want to present the Gospel as an orator, competing for students as they did.  In fact, Paul never claims disciples.  This is really what is behind his disclaimer on baptism in 1 Cor 1:14-16.  He come to Corinth to create a community of disciples from which he might receive patronage and prestige.

Paul does not want to be considered a philosopher who is gathering disciples, nor does he want that for Apollos or Peter or any man.  So rather that detailing their accomplishments as orators, Paul describes their functions (Paul planted, Apollos watered, etc.)   Christians are all disciples, or better, stewards and servants of the mysteries of God (1 Cor 4:1).

The real problem behind the “divisions” is that the church continues to act like Christianity is just another philosophy, and teachers are in competition with each other just as the Greek orators competed.  They are still acting “just like the world.”  This is the challenge of the “divisions” in 1 Corinthians –  how does the modern church act “just like the world”? In what ways have we failed to “de-paganize”? I do not think things have improved much since the first century.

As usual, Paul attends the synagogue meetings in the city and argues that Jesus is the Messiah.  This ministry is more successful when Silas and Timothy catch up to Paul, allowing him to devote himself to preaching. It is as a result of this synagogue ministry that there is another “rejection” of the Jews, parallel to Acts 13 and 28.  Paul declares that from that time on he will go to the Gentiles, as he did in Acts 13 as well.

Corinthian StreetTwo key converts are mentioned – Titius Justus, a god-fearing Gentile and Crispus, the leader of the synagogue.  A third convert is implied in Romans 16:23 – Erastus, the “director of public works” (NIV) or city treasurer. It is unusual for Paul to identify a person by title like this, but this is an important title (Theissen, 76) What makes this person of particular significance is that in 1929 an inscription on paving stone was discovered honoring Erastus, identified as the aedilis of Corinth, a title normally translated by the Greek agoranomos. The title given in Romans is that of oikonomos of the city.  While this is not exactly equivalent, it is close enough that many have made the connection between this convert in Romans 16:23 and the city manager of Corinth in the mid-50’s.

Paul may have been concerned that his success would breed a violent back-lash from the synagogue, as it had in Thessalonica. In fact, Paul has seen this happen before.  The normal pattern is for him to enter the synagogue and face serious persecution.  He is not afraid for his own life, in fact, he seems more than willing to suffer physically for the Gospel.

1 Cor 2:3-4 indicates that Paul was afraid his ministry was destined for failure.  He does not yet know of the fate of the Thessalonican believers, perhaps even Berea is unknown to him.  Athens likely did not result in a church.  Will Corinth go just as badly?  Yet in 1 Cor 2, Paul claims that any success in Corinth was based solely on the the power of the Holy Spirit, not his own rhetorical ability.

1 Corinthians 2:3-4 I came to you in weakness and fear, and with much trembling. My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power.

In Acts 18:9-10 Luke tells us that Paul has a vision in which the Lord tells Paul that he will not be harmed in the city of Corinth and that there are many people in the city that are “the Lord’s.”  There are three short, related commands: Do not fear, continue to speak, and do not be silent.

If these commands reflect Paul’s mood prior to Silas and Timothy’s return, then it is possible that Paul considered, like Jeremiah before him, do remain silent and not open himself up to further persecution (Jer 20:7-12).  Like Jeremiah, Paul cannot keep the Gospel to himself, he must be what he is, the light to the Gentiles.  Even if this means he will be persecuted.  This vision encourages him to continue, since his Gospel message will be received in Corinth.

He will remain in the city 18 months, Paul’s longest place of ministry since his commission from Antioch in Acts 13.

Bibliography:

H. J. Cadbury, “Erastus of Corinth” JBL 50 (1931) 42–58.

J. Murphy-O’Connor, “The Corinth That Saint Paul Saw” BA 47 (1984) 147–59.

Gerd Theissen, The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity. Essays on Corinth (Philadelphia:  Fortress, 1982).

Bruce Winter, After Paul Left Corinth: The Influence of Secular Ethics and Social Change (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2001)

This was written by one of my students. He has some good thoughts, interacting with Michael Bird and some things I said a few days ago here. Go read it, let him know what you think!

taczhompson

This week for my Acts class, we had to comment on a post about the city of Corinth being referred to as “Sin City”, and it brought to mind some rather significant things about the culture we live in. I feel like, too often, Christians look around at the culture they live in, and see no hope for the salvation of our nation. Or, we look at everyone around us, and make unrealistically quick judgements about how “sinful” that person’s life must be. The city of Corinth is often related to our culture, because it is assumed that is was an “un-ordinarily” (I’m not entirely sure if that’s actually a word) sinful city. The relations is that it is also assumed that our culture is the same level of sinful.

I have heard Corinth spoken with the illustration of “Sin City” so many times, I had never even questioned it…

View original post 736 more words

Sin City LogoSince I am spending time in Corinth this week (in class, not it real life, sadly enough), I thought I would dispense right away with the classic Pastor’s preaching point that Corinth was a “San Francisco of the ancient world.”  I think Chuck Swindoll said that, so most pastors have picked it up and try to illustrate how bad Paul’s church was by comparing it to Haight-Ashbury circa 1969.  This is one of those points that gets picked up in a commentary and repeated with little additional research, sadly it is not exactly accurate.

Usually the evidence for this sexual freedom is that the city was built around two ports and attracted sailors.  In addition, there is usually some reference to the temple of Aphrodite with 2000 prostitutes.  While the reputation is deserved, it has little to do with the city that Paul visited – all of these sorts of things were true of Greek Corinth, almost 400 years prior to the time of Paul!  I cite Jerome Murphy-O’Connor:

Such success inevitably provoked the envy of those less fortunate in their location and less industrious in their habits, and so in the 5th–4th centuries b.c., Athenian writers made Corinth the symbol of commercialized love. Aristophanes coined the verb korinthiazesthai, “to fornicate” (Fr. 354).  Philetaerus and Poliochus wrote plays entitled Korinthiastes, “The Whoremonger” (Athenaeus 313c, 559a). Plato used korinthia kore, “a Corinthian girl,” to mean a prostitute (Rest. 404d). These neologisms, however, left no permanent mark on the language, because in reality Corinth was neither better nor worse than its contemporaries. (Murphy-O’Connor, ABD 1:1135).

SinCity

In fact, the whole Roman empire at the time Paul visited the Corinth had sexual morals that were significantly different than those of the Jews and the early Christians. Corinth was no less moral that Ephesus or Thessalonica.  This is not to say that the city of Corinth was virtuous, no one was singing “I Wish They Could All Be Corinthian Girls.”  Perhaps it is better to think of the Greco-Roman world as having a radically different sexual ethic as Christianity.  The type of sexual morality Paul’s gospel demands simply cut across the grain of the culture of the Greco-Roman world, as it should in the modern world.

When we teach that the Corinthian believers struggled with a culture that was oppose to Christianity in this way, we someone imply that things were better in Ephesus or Rome.  That is absolutely not the case!  All Christians struggled to relate this new faith to the culture in which they live, in A.D. 55 Corinth or modern America.

In fact, I think that the problem in Corinth was not that the city was ‘sinful,” but that the church had members who were wealthy and powerful.  The problems reflected in the letters to the Corinthians are not the result of living in a city full of sinners who tempting the pure-at-heart Christians. The real problem was Christians insisting on living as wealthy powerful members of the Greco-Roman world, not as humble servants of other believers in Christ.

If we are going to accurately preach Corinthians, we need to stop relating the city of Corinth to San Francisco or Las Vegas. Rather, we need to start comparing the church at Corinth to the (wealthy, politically powerful) American church.

CorinthAs usual, Paul attends the synagogue meetings in the city and argues that Jesus is the Messiah.  This ministry is more successful when Silas and Timothy catch up to Paul, allowing him to devote himself to preaching. It is as a result of this synagogue ministry that there is another “rejection” of the Jews, parallel to Acts 13 and 28.  Paul declares that from that time on he will go to the Gentiles, as he did in Acts 13 as well.

Two key converts are mentioned – Titius Justus, a god-fearing Gentile and Crispus, the leader of the synagogue.  A third convert is implied in Romans 16:23 – Erastus, the “director of public works” (NIV) or city treasurer. It is unusual for Paul to identify a person by title like this, but this is an important title (Theissen, 76) What makes this person of particular significance is that in 1929 an inscription on paving stone was discovered honoring Erastus, identified as the aedilis of Corinth, a title normally translated by the Greek agoranomos. The title given in Romans is that of oikonomos of the city.  While this is not exactly equivalent, it is close enough that many have made the connection between this convert in Romans 16:23 and the city manager of Corinth in the mid-50’s.

Paul may have been concerned that his success would breed a violent back-lash from the synagogue, as it had in Thessalonica. In fact, Paul has seen this happen before.  The normal pattern is for him to enter the synagogue and face serious persecution.  He is not afraid for his own life, in fact, he seems more than willing to suffer physically for the Gospel.

1 Cor 2:3-4 indicates that Paul was afraid his ministry was destined for failure.  He does not yet know of the fate of the Thessalonican believers, perhaps even Berea is unknown to him.  Athens likely did not result in a church.  Will Corinth go just as badly?  Yet in 1 Cor 2, Paul claims that any success in Corinth was based solely on the the power of the Holy Spirit, not his own rhetorical ability.

1 Corinthians 2:3-4 I came to you in weakness and fear, and with much trembling. My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power.

In Acts 18:9-10 Luke tells us that Paul has a vision in which the Lord tells Paul that he will not be harmed in the city of Corinth and that there are many people in the city that are “the Lord’s.”  There are three short, related commands: Do not fear, continue to speak, and do not be silent.

If these commands reflect Paul’s mood prior to Silas and Timothy’s return, then it is possible that Paul considered, like Jeremiah before him, do remain silent and not open himself up to further persecution (Jer 20:7-12).  Like Jeremiah, Paul cannot keep the Gospel to himself, he must be what he is, the light to the Gentiles.  Even if this means he will be persecuted.  This vision encourages him to continue, since his Gospel message will be received in Corinth.

He will remain in the city 18 months, Paul’s longest place of ministry since his commission from Antioch in Acts 13.

Bibliography:

H. J. Cadbury, “Erastus of Corinth” JBL 50 (1931) 42–58.

J. Murphy-O’Connor, “The Corinth That Saint Paul Saw” BA 47 (1984) 147–59.

Gerd Theissen, The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity. Essays on Corinth (Philadelphia:  Fortress, 1982).

Bruce Winter, After Paul Left Corinth: The Influence of Secular Ethics and Social Change (Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 2001)

Silas was a Jewish Christian who appears to have been active in the Jerusalem church, assuming that the Silas mentioned in 15:22 is the same man (see Witherington, Acts, 473.).  That Luke should mention a character in one context then pick him up again later is a common feature of the book.

SilasSilas is likely an Aramaic form of the name Saul.  The Silvanus of 1 Peter 5:12 is likely the same man since Peter would have know Silas from Jerusalem.  Silas is mentioned frequently in Paul’s letters, 2 Cor 1:19, and he is a “co-sender of the Thessalonian letters (1 Thess 1:1 and 2 Thess 1:1).  It is therefore suggested that he functioned as a secretary for Paul in the writing of these letters (and perhaps others).  1 Thess 2:6 refers to the “apostles of Christ,” which may imply that he was considered an apostle like Barnabas, although not from the Twelve.

Silas was a Roman citizen since Acts 16:37 implies that he was imprisoned illegally. This would seem to imply he was a Hellenistic Jew.  His name confirms his: he is also known as Silvanus, a Roman cognomen meaning “wood,” and the same name as the Roman god Silvanus, a life-giving deity (Gillman, “Silas,” in ABD 6:22).

He traveled with Paul for most of the second missionary journey.  In Acts 17 he and Timothy returned  to Berea and Thessalonica while Paul continued on to Athens and  Corinth.  R. C. Campbell suggests that since Silas was able to return to these locations indicates that Silas was “less controversial” than Paul (ISBE Rev, 4:509).  This might be true, but it may be that Silas was more acceptable to the Jews socially and theologically than Paul.  What is remarkable is that after he joins Paul in Corinth, he drops out of the story.

B. N. Kaye suggested that Luke used Athens and Corinth to signal a shift in Paul’s strategy: “Luke is pre-occupied with the re-direction of Paul’s mission from the synagogue where it  is directed towards the Jews, to a house where it is directed explicitly, though not exclusively, to the Gentiles” (25).  This shift to the Gentile mission in Corinth receives a confirmation when Paul is vindicated in court before Gallio. I would add that Corinth is Paul’s most successful church up to this point in Acts, although there are a host of problems associated with non-God-Fearing Gentiles coming to Christ.

So why Silas?  Like Barnabas, he was a Hellenistic Jew yet he was firmly rooted in the Jerusalem church.  Paul seems to have wanted a companion who was “acceptable” to Jerusalem, perhaps to preempt any criticism of his Gentile mission by the more conservative elements of the Jerusalem church.  Paul would therefore represent the Antioch churches, Silas the Jerusalem churches, implying that any mission to the Gentiles was co-sponsored by both centers of Christianity.  Does Silas depart after Paul makes his declaration in the synagogue in Corinth?  We cannot know for sure, but it is possible this he he reacted against Paul’s turn to the Gentiles, similar to John Mark after the incident on Cyprus.

Bibliography: Bruce N.Kaye, “Acts’ Portrayal of Silas,”  Novum testamentum, 21 (1979): 13-26.

David Pettigrew left a comment on my Corinth – City of Sin post last week pointing out a recent post on the blog, Mediterranean Palimpsest .  This is a  summary of the Dallas DeForest’s work in the Oscar Broneer papers stored at the Blegen Library.  Broneer was a Swedish archaeologist who specialized in Corinth.  Among the many things in the archive is a New York Times article dates Sept 2, 1950 describing the ancient city of Corinth as an “Old Grecian Paris” and a “modern day Miami Beach.”  DeForest says:

In fact, his excavation of the Stoa made the front page of the New York Times on September 2, 1950. In many ways, the title (and subtitles) announce the article’s perspective: “Old ‘Grecian Paris’ is Scholar’s Prize; Notorious Corinth’s Night Life Centered on Big Colonnade and 33 Adjoining Clubs; 1,000 Girls Made Music; Drinking Cups, Dice, Flutes, Money brought to Light by 17 Year’s Excavations.”

To misquote Dr. Strangelove, a fella could have a pretty good time with all that stuff.  Dice and Flutes?  I imagine a fundamentalist preacher in 1950 read that and assumed playing cards and billiards were Corinthian inventions.

Obviously this is a bit of popular newspaper journalism, leading with the exciting news before getting to the actual details.  It did surprise me, though, to see the  the media in 1950 making the same sort of “Corinth was a city of sin” as preachers do today. It is possible that the popular commentators heard these sensational reports while they were in seminary and simply passed them along as fact.  It was in the NY Times, so it must be true, right?

This brings me to Pettigrew’s site, Corinthian Matters.   He has some comments which are along the same lines as my post, but adds:  “it made me wonder how much Broneer himself was responsible for forming certain images of Corinth (e.g., the sex capital of the ancient world) that recent scholarship has problematized or disproved.”   A easy enough way to test this theory would be to read popular commentaries on 1-2 Corinthians prior to 1950, if the sin-city tag is found in a 19th century commentary, the Broneer is not the originator.

Perhaps the moral of the story is that scholars ought to be very careful when the attempt to use public media, your speculations may outlive you!

Follow Reading Acts on WordPress.com

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 4,197 other followers

My book Jesus the Bridegroom is now available from Amazon in paperback or Kindle


Christian Theology

%d bloggers like this: