My premise here is that contentious members of Paul’s congregation were espousing “persuasive words of wisdom” in 1 Corinthians chapters 1-4, and they were the same ones that denied Paul’s version of a resurrection in chapter 15 --- and that the points of view of the contentious members that Paul argued against in both sections were influenced by Greek metaphysical concepts of the time.
The Corinthians were obviously won-over to the enriching nature of Paul’s heavenly Christ spirit. Paul’s Christ as an effective conduit to the great god of the Jews was not at issue.
But, I think some of the most contested issues in the densely-packed 1 Corinthians can be accounted for by challenging Paul’s point of view with a single work of ancient Greek literature. Considered among Plato’s most important works, Phaedo (ca. 360 BCE) --- also known to the ancients as On the Soul --- depicts dialogues of Socrates with some of his acquaintances immediately prior to his death.
I don’t claim that Paul’s troublesome Corinthians were necessarily arguing directly from the Phaedo --- only that some of the Greek metaphysical concepts represented in that work can shed significant light on their point of view.
In the bigger picture, many of the issues in 1 Corinthians represent a clash of cultures --- Paul’s Jewish provenance and conservative sensibilities vs. free-wheeling and free-thinking Hellenists.
I think Paul and some of the Corinthians held very different basic assumptions on the nature of the body and the soul --- and the fate of those after death. Paul claimed to have once followed the precepts of the Pharisees “according to the law” (Philippians 3:5). I suspect Paul’s system carried along at least some basic assumptions from Pharisaic concepts of resurrection.
If one can rely on the report of Josephus --- the Pharisees believed in some sort of embodied resurrection of the righteous ---
They say that all souls are incorruptible, but that the souls of good men only are removed into other bodies, --- but that the souls of bad men are subject to eternal punishment … (Josephus, Wars 2.8.14)
This Pharisaic concept of being “removed into other bodies” is clearly reflected in Paul’s extended arguments about the nature of the resurrected body (1 Corinthians 15:35-56) ---
So also the resurrection from the dead: It is sown in decay; it is raised in immortality. … It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body … (1 Cor 15:42-44)
More from Josephus about the Pharisees ---
They also believe that souls have an immortal rigor in them, and that under the earth there will be rewards or punishments, according as they have lived virtuously or viciously in this life; and the latter are to be detained in an everlasting prison, but that the former shall have power to revive and live again; on account of which doctrines they are able greatly to persuade the body of the people … (Josephus, Ant. 18.1.3)
In the Phaedo, Socrates relates the events and judgements all men face upon death, including punishments and forms of embodiment for the lesser souls, and beautiful abodes without bodies for the philosophically purified. There are some similarities to the Pharisaic concepts ---
Now when the dead have come to the place where each is led by his genius, first they are judged and sentenced, as they have lived well and piously, or not. And those who are found to have lived neither well nor ill, go to the Acheron … there they dwell and are purified, and if they have done any wrong they are absolved by paying the penalty … and for their good deeds they receive rewards, … But those who appear to be incurable, on account of the greatness of their wrongdoings … are cast by their fitting destiny into Tartarus, whence they never emerge. Those, however, who are curable, but are found to have committed great sins … and have lived in repentance the rest of their lives … these must needs be thrown into Tartarus, and when they have been there a year the wave casts them out … if they prevail they come out and cease from their ills, but if not, they are borne away again to Tartarus and thence back into the rivers, and this goes on until they prevail upon those whom they have wronged …
… those who are found to have excelled in holy living are freed from these regions within the earth and are released as from prisons; they mount upward into their pure abode and dwell upon the earth.
… those who have duly purified themselves by philosophy live henceforth altogether without bodies, and pass to still more beautiful abodes which it is not easy to describe … because of all these things which we have recounted we ought to do our best to acquire virtue and wisdom in life. For the prize is fair and the hope great. (Plato, Phaedo 113d-114c)
… those who are found to have excelled in holy living are freed from these regions within the earth and are released as from prisons; they mount upward into their pure abode and dwell upon the earth.
… those who have duly purified themselves by philosophy live henceforth altogether without bodies, and pass to still more beautiful abodes which it is not easy to describe … because of all these things which we have recounted we ought to do our best to acquire virtue and wisdom in life. For the prize is fair and the hope great. (Plato, Phaedo 113d-114c)
Socrates qualified these scenarios with a statement that no one actually knows for sure what happens, but that one should none-the-less believe, because ---
… this or something like it is true concerning our souls and their abodes, since the soul is shown to be immortal, I think he may properly and worthily venture to believe; for the venture is well worth while … (Plato, Phaedo 114d)
Some of the Corinthians rejected Paul’s concept of the resurrection from the dead ---
… how do some among you say that there is no resurrection from the dead? (1 Cor 15:12)
I doubt they rejected all forms of release from death, or immortality of the soul --- but rather only Paul’s version. But why?
I think the conflict was related to the timing. In Paul’s system, those believers who die will not be resurrected until “the end” at “His coming” (1 Cor 15:22-24).
“The Lord Himself will descend from heaven ... and the dead in Christ will rise first.” (1 Thessalonians 4:16 ).
As a model for their own fates, the delay inherent in Paul’s resurrection of the dead was, I think, not acceptable to some of the Corinthians.
Paul contrasted his own power of the spirit against “persuasive word of wisdom” (1 Cor 2:4) and Paul accused some of the Corinthians of claiming to be “wise in Christ” (1 Cor 4:10). And Paul mocked them ---
Already you are filled; already you have been enriched; apart from us you reigned; and I wish that really you did reign, so that we also might reign with you. (1 Cor 4:8)
I think these Corinthians did not accept Paul’s concept of a delayed resurrection from the dead for their own fate, and they chose to challenge Paul. I think they believed that they had achieved adequate wisdom in life --- being “wise in Christ” --- to provide, upon death, a direct conduit to the great heavenly god of the Jews such that their immortal souls would be directly released from their bodies to achieve a union with god.
… the soul is most like the divine, and immortal and intellectual … when a man dies, the visible part of him, the body, which lies in the visible world … is naturally subject to dissolution and decomposition … But the soul, the invisible, which departs into another place which is, like itself, noble and pure and invisible, to the realm of the god of the other world in truth, to the good and wise god, whither, if God will, my (Socrates) soul is soon to go … (Plato, Phaedo 80b-d)
Yes, Paul promoted a coming of Jesus soon --- but in those days, death loomed nearer to everyone compared to most of us today. Sure, some among the Corinthians were arrogant and argumentative --- but perhaps they only wanted to be ready --- and be right-minded. If they died, they did not want to pass through the underworld, nor to wait and lie in the dust of the earth until “He comes”. These Corinthians believed they had gained adequate wisdom in Christ to enter directly upon death into communion with god ---
Plato ---
… those who have duly purified themselves by philosophy live henceforth altogether without bodies, and pass to still more beautiful abodes which it is not easy to describe … (Plato, Phaedo 114c)
And no one who has not been a philosopher and who is not wholly pure when he departs, is allowed to enter into the communion of the gods, but only the lover of knowledge. (Plato, Phaedo 82b-c)
And no one who has not been a philosopher and who is not wholly pure when he departs, is allowed to enter into the communion of the gods, but only the lover of knowledge. (Plato, Phaedo 82b-c)
Paul ---
For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; and the intelligence of the intelligent I will set-aside" … has not god made foolish the wisdom of the world? (1 Cor 1:19-20)
The meal Paul served was the full course --- but some among the Corinthians preferred a la carte.
robert j
Plato’s Phaedo ---
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... t%3DPhaedo