Stephan Huller wrote (on another thread),
Paul isn't saying 'I love the Creator' but I am the Demiurge or better yet (and even crazier) I am the Demiurge 'supercharged' or raised to the next level by being united with Jesus. He is certainly drawing from the Platonic notion of the Creator as a Demiurge but then applies that to himself in the Church.
So can we at least agree that Paul identified himself as the Demiurge?
No, I don’t agree with your suggestion that Paul claimed to be the Demiurge because,
1) I believe your use of the Patristic sources is over-extended and unconvincing, and,
2) More importantly, I believe you are misinterpreting what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 3:10-11.
I have expressed my opinions on the reliability of the Patristic heresiologists several times before on this forum and see no need to elaborate on that topic here. On this topic one must take these late, secondary sources, these biased church interpretations and polemics, with a grain of salt and turn to the primary source. The only primary source --- 1 Corinthians.
Paul neither claims, nor implies, that he is the Demiurge, that is, a supernatural creator of the universe.
I believe most Pauline investigators make the mistake of trying to understand Paul primarily by means of his theological arguments. The verses in question here provide an excellent case-in-point.
Sure, Paul used theological arguments --- but Paul’s purpose was more mundane, more human. Paul formulated his argument for the direct purpose of maintaining his authority with the congregation --- just as he did in much of 1 and 2 Corinthians and Galatians.
First, Paul’s words specific to his claim as a “master-builder” ---
Clearly Paul is not claiming to be the master-builder of the entire world, but only that he laid a foundation “which is Jesus Christ” --- Paul brought the knowledge of the Christ spirit to the Corinthian congregation.“According to the grace of God having been given to me, as a wise master-builder, I have laid the foundation, but another is building upon it. But let every man take heed how he builds for no one is able to lay another foundation beside the one being laid, which is Jesus Christ.” (1 Corinthians 3:10-11)
And now, some background on the threat to Paul’s authority that led to his argument in this passage. The fractious Corinthians were not fully accepting his leadership. Paul complained,
This passage has spawned a wide variety of interpretations. Many, to my mind, are too convoluted. Paul devotes many verses to address the perceived competition from his co-worker Apollos, and I’ll elaborate on that below."It was made clear to me about you, my brothers, by those of Chloe's group, that there are quarrels among you. What I am saying is this --- each of you says, 'I'm of Paul', or 'I'm of Apollos', or 'I'm of Cephas', or 'I'm of Christ'" (1 Cor. 1:11-12).
But one can only guess about the references to Cephas and the Christ, as neither had visited the congregation. So, on those two, I’ll just guess and provide plausible scenarios.
Perhaps some of the Corinthians found, in the primacy of the spiritual awakening of Cephas, their preferred human role-model in the Christ spirit. According to Paul's retelling of tradition that he had previously told the Corinthians, Cephas was the first human to experience knowledge of the heavenly Christ spirit. (1 Cor. 15, verses 1, 3 and 5). That would make Cephas a founding figure --- a pinnacle position in most religions.
Paul's mention of "I'm of Christ" seems to present the most difficult challenge to explain, and generates a wide range of interpretations. After all, weren't they all with Christ? I don’t think the phrase needs to create a problem. Some among the fractious and sophisticated Corinthians were already "full", as Paul accused them;
Certainly some among the Corinthians might have said, "Why do we need Apollos, or Cephas, or even Paul? We don't need any of them. We need nothing more than the spirit of God through Christ --- I'm with Christ.""Already you are full, already you were enriched, apart from us you reigned. I wish you did reign, that we might also reign with you." (1 Cor. 4:8).
And now back to Apollos, who was apparently no longer in Corinth by this time. (1 Cor. 16:12). Paul devoted all of chapter 3 to address the perceived threat from Apollos, including the argument that includes Paul’s claim as a master-builder.
After Paul first evangelized the Corinthian congregation, Apollos apparently remained behind to complete the work, as a coworker,
Some of the Corinthians really must have liked this Apollos, for the jealous and assertive Paul to claim only a place of equality for himself. Paul needed to bring Apollos down a few notches, to plant some seeds of doubt, but he had to tread carefully,"So, who is Apollos? And who is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, and to each as the Lord gave. I planted and Apollos watered … he that plants and he that waters are one … for we are God's fellow-workers … " (1 Cor. 3:5-9).
Directly following this passage, Paul cast doubts on the quality of the building Apollos constructed on his foundation, saying whether built of precious metals or stones or wood or hay or straw --- in fire the quality of each one's work will be revealed. (1 Cor. 3:12-15).“According to the grace of God having been given to me, as a wise master-builder, I have laid the foundation, but another is building upon it. But let every man take heed how he builds ...” (1 Corinthians 3:10).
Continuing to cast doubts on the work of Apollos,
Except for another brief and related mention in chapter 4, and a brief mention in chapter 16 indicating that Apollos was in Ephesus at the time, we hear no more about Apollos from Paul."Don't you know that you are the temple of God and the spirit of God dwells in you? If anyone destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, as are you." (1 Cor. 3:16-17).
In the end, it's just Paul working hard to maintain his authority and his leadership --- his path to God through his Christ.
Paul only shared authority with Barnabus, Jesus Christ, and God.
robert j.
