Is 1 Cor 11:23-27 an Interpolation? (split)

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Doherty's reading of the Lord's Supper (1 Cor 11)

Post by Bernard Muller »

How is the cup different than the bread in this respect? If the Last Supper passage is an interpolation, are they not both (bread and cup) referring back directly to 10.16 and indirectly to the concept of eating and drinking in 11.22?
I forgot "the bread" in 11:28.
Bread and cup in 11:28 referring to 10:16? In between 10:16 and 11:28, there are no less than 41 verses and one different topic (women covering their hair). So I am very doubtful Paul would expect his readers/listeners to figure out the bread and the cup are related to the ones in 10:16.

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Doherty's reading of the Lord's Supper (1 Cor 11)

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Bernard Muller wrote:
How is the cup different than the bread in this respect? If the Last Supper passage is an interpolation, are they not both (bread and cup) referring back directly to 10.16 and indirectly to the concept of eating and drinking in 11.22?
I forgot "the bread" in 11:28.
Bread and cup in 11:28 referring to 10:16? In between 10:16 and 11:28, there are no less than 41 verses and one different topic (women covering their hair). So I am very doubtful Paul would expect his readers/listeners to figure out the bread and the cup are related to the ones in 10:16.
Even if it is a communal meal that the Corinthians regularly practice, for better or worse? They would still have no idea what "bread and cup" meant? Really?

In the Didache, the cup and the bread are introduced just as suddenly. "First, concerning the cup." What cup? No cup has been mentioned yet. "And concerning the broken bread." What broken bread? The readers are assumed to know what these things mean, not from previous passages, but from their own practice.

Same goes for the Corinthians and Paul.
Last edited by Ben C. Smith on Sat Dec 19, 2015 2:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Drive by

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Ben C. Smith wrote:Is Paul playing with two different orders of the eucharistic elements (cup/bread in chapter 10, bread/cup in chapter 11)? Or does his order rather reflect the shorter Lucan order and that found in the Didache (cup/bread), with the relevant verses in chapter 11 being an interpolation based on the other order (bread/cup), which eventually came to dominate?
Against my suggestion is the order bread/cup in 11.28 (and surrounding verses):

Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup.

ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Doherty's reading of the Lord's Supper (1 Cor 11)

Post by Bernard Muller »

Since 1 Corinthians 11 follows the order of Matthew and Mark, not to mention John and Justin Martyr, is bread/cup the preferred Pauline order? Well, 1 Corinthians 10.16, 19 has cup/bread
The practice of eating bread first (in antiquity, the main food) and then after the meal drinking wine, is a Gentile tradition and not a Jewish one:
"... a two part sequence of eating and drinking, of breaking bread and pouring a libation before drinking wine, or more simply, of bread and wine, summarizes and symbolizes the whole process of a Greco-Roman formal meal"
John Dominic Crossan, The Historical Jesus.

I do not think Paul meant to put in the proper sequence wine and bread in 1 Cor 10:16: wine then bread would go against the established traditional sequence of his Gentile Christians for their meal.
Also, the order of bread then cup in 1 Cor 11:28, and "eats" then "drinks" in the next verse is consistent with the sequence in 11:23-27 but against the one in 10:16.

Cordially, Bernard
Last edited by Bernard Muller on Sat Dec 19, 2015 3:47 pm, edited 3 times in total.
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8048
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Doherty's reading of the Lord's Supper (1 Cor 11)

Post by Peter Kirby »

The passage also stands out for the amount of verbal agreement with the gospels, otherwise unprecedented in the Pauline epistles.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Doherty's reading of the Lord's Supper (1 Cor 11)

Post by Bernard Muller »

In the Didache, the cup and the bread are introduced just as suddenly. "First, concerning the cup." What cup? No cup has been mentioned yet. "And concerning the broken bread." What broken bread? The readers are assumed to know what these things mean, not from previous passages, but from their own practice.
The Eucharist is mentioned first (a few words earlier), so the readers would know the cup refers to the one used for the Eucharist ritual.
About the order in the Didache, Crossan wrote it is according to the Jewish system (THJ p. 363). And this ebionistic tract is directed to either Jews or God fearer Gentiles or both.

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Doherty's reading of the Lord's Supper (1 Cor 11)

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Bernard Muller wrote:
In the Didache, the cup and the bread are introduced just as suddenly. "First, concerning the cup." What cup? No cup has been mentioned yet. "And concerning the broken bread." What broken bread? The readers are assumed to know what these things mean, not from previous passages, but from their own practice.
The Eucharist is mentioned first (a few words earlier), so the readers would know the cup refers to the one used for the Eucharist ritual.
And in 1 Corinthians 11.20, the dominical supper is mentioned, so the readers would know the cup refers to the one used for the dominical supper.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Doherty's reading of the Lord's Supper (1 Cor 11)

Post by Bernard Muller »

To Ben,
And in 1 Corinthians 11.20, the dominical supper is mentioned, so the readers would know the cup refers to the one used for the dominical supper.
I do not know from where you got "dominical". Any Lord's supper then was a common meal which would take place any day and with no ritual before Paul, indirectly, at the earliest, through 1 Cor 11:23-27, might have started one (it is more likely the Eucharist started to be practiced due to the influence of the gospels).
In 11:28, we have the bread and the cup, suggesting a specific loaf of bread and a specific cup (as in 11:23-27).
And then we have in this verse "so" ('οὕτως'), which could mean also:
"likewise" or "after this manner".
The "so' seems to be a reference to what precedes, 11:23-27 (RSV):
Let a man examine himself, and so [likewise, after this manner] eat of the bread and drink of the cup.

Now, I am not in favor at all about 11:23-27 being an interpolation because 11:28 appears to be a link between 11:23-27 and what follows.

Cordially, Bernard
Last edited by Bernard Muller on Sat Dec 19, 2015 8:02 pm, edited 2 times in total.
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Doherty's reading of the Lord's Supper (1 Cor 11)

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Bernard Muller wrote:I do not know from where you got "dominical". But that's beside the point.
Latin dominus = Greek κύριος.
Latin dominicus = Greek κυριακός (1 Corinthians 11.20).
Latin dominicus > English "dominical".
In 11:28, we have the bread and the cup, suggesting a specific loaf of bread and a specific cup (as in 11:23-27).
And then we have in this verse "so" ('οὕτως'), which could mean also:
"likewise" or "after this manner".
The "so' seems to be a reference to what precedes, 11:23-27 (RSV):
Let a man examine himself, and so [likewise, after this manner] eat of the bread and drink of the cup.

Now, I am not in favor at all about 11:23-27 being an interpolation because 11:28 appears to be a link between 11:23-27 and what follows.
That is a different argument. Do you acknowledge that the Corinthian readers could easily grasp what the bread and the cup were based on the mention of the dominical supper in 1 Corinthians 11.20, just like the readers of the Didache could easily grasp what the cup and the bread were based on the mention of the Eucharist?
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Doherty's reading of the Lord's Supper (1 Cor 11)

Post by Bernard Muller »

to Ben,
Latin dominus = Greek κύριος.
Latin dominicus = Greek κυριακός (1 Corinthians 11.20).
Latin dominicus > English "dominical".
I can see the progression here, but κυριακός means "of the Lord" in the times of Paul and not yet "Sunday". If for you κυριακός means "dominical" as "of the Lord" I would agree, but not if you think it meant "Sunday". That will come much later.
That is a different argument.
Yes, but consolidating my position.
Do you acknowledge that the Corinthian readers could easily grasp what the bread and the cup were based on the mention of the dominical supper in 1 Corinthians 11.20, just like the readers of the Didache could easily grasp what the cup and the bread were based on the mention of the Eucharist?
NO, for reasons already explained (see my addition to my previous post).

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
Post Reply