Novum Testamentum, Vol. XVII,fase.

RECOVERING THE POETIC STRUCTURE

O F 1 COR. i 17 - ii 2 A Study in Text and Commentary
BY

K. E. BAILEY
Beirut, Lebanon

Paul of Tarsus has been called "artisan, scholar, traveller, leader of men" x), and above all, theologian, but rarely if at all, poet. In this study we intend to demonstrate that Paul is in fact a highly skilled poet and that this aspect of his genius is brilliantly demonstrated in I Cor. i 17-ii 2 which is a single poem with a number ot editorial comments and changes which fall into five types. These comments and changes can be clearly identified because of the precise nature of the poetic form which the text preserves intact 2 ). The poetic form is here seen as new evidence for a wide range of questions relating to the text and its interpretation. It will be suggested that St. Paul is most probably the author of some of the editorial expansions and, if so, he is re-using older material. The overall structure of the poem will be examined first and then the individual sections. The editorial changes will be discussed as they occur. Finally, some summary of the significance of the poetic form will be attempted. T. W. MANSON observed in the Synoptic Gospels what he called, "the parallelism of whole strophes or oracles, a form which produces an effect of singular intensity and dramatic power" 3 ). This study is an attempt to identify and analyze a parallelistic oracle that is
x ) C. H. DODD, The Meaning of Paul for Today (London: Fontana, c. 1920, 1958), p. 9. 2 ) This study is made with a full awareness both of the contribution and

the inadequacy of FORBES, BULLINGER, and

L U N D . Cf. JOHN FORBER,

The

Symmetrical Structure of Scripture (Edinburgh: n.p., 1854); E. W. BULLINGER, Figures of Speech used in the Bible (London : Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1898); N. W. LUND, Chiasmus in the New Testament (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1942). 8 ) T. W. MANSON, The Teaching of Jesus (Cambridge: at the University Press, c. i935> *955)> P 55-

266

. . BAILEY

far more sophisticated than what Manson describes in the Gospels4). Initially there is need for a frame of reference and a few defini tions. The key to Biblical poetry has long been recognized as parallelism 5 ). The relationships between two parallelistic lines can best be described as "correspondences" 6 ). The relationships between lines in this poem fall into three categories. These will be called ' 'standard parallelism" 7 ), "step parallelism'' 8 ), and "inverted parallelism" 9 ). Finally, that section of the poem which, as a unit, is repeated elsewhere in the poem will be named "the semantic unit" or more simply, "the unit" 1 0 ) . With these defini tions in mind, a number of general observations need be made regarding the poem under consideration. The poetic structures of the New Testament demonstrate an artistic form of great sophistication in the intricate combinations
) F o r a n e x t e n s i v e s t u d y of parallelism of lines a n d clauses, cf. M a t t h e w B L A C K , An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts (Oxford: C l a r e n d o n Press, 1967), p p . 143-160. 5 ) R . L O W T H , De sacra poesi Hebraeorum praelectiones academicae, trans l a t e d from t h e L a t i n b y G. G R E G O R Y (New edition w i t h n o t e s b y Calvin E . S T O W E ; A n d o v e r : n. p . , 1829). e ) A. J . E H L E N , " T h e P o e t i c S t r u c t u r e of a H o d a y a t from Q u m r a n " ( U n p u b l i s h e d P h . D . T h e s i s ; H a r v a r d D i v i n i t y School, H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y , C a m b r i d g e , 1970). E H L E N h a s developed a useful m e t h o d o l o g y for a n a l y z i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s b e t w e e n parallel lines u n d e r t h e categories of g r a m m a t i c a l , a u d i t o r y , a n d s e m a n t i c c o r r e s p o n d e n c e s . T h e s e t h r e e categories will b e used in t h i s s t u d y . 7 ) B y " s t a n d a r d p a r a l l e l i s m " we refer t o t h e A A ' B B ' C C p a t t e r n w h e r e t h e second line of t h e parallelism follows i m m e d i a t e l y after t h e first. 8 ) " S t e p p a r a l l e l i s m " will b e used t o refer t o a n A C-' B ' C p a t t e r n w h e r e a series of t h e m e s a r e s t a t e d a n d t h e n r e p e a t e d in t h e s a m e order. 9 ) T h i s p h r a s e i n d i c a t e d a n A C-C B ' A ' p a t t e r n of c o r r e s p o n d i n g lines. T h i s d e s i g n a t i o n w a s used b y J o h n J E B B , Sacred Literature (London: n.p., 1920). T h e m o r e c o m m o n t e r m " c h i a s m u s " will b e preserved for precise reference t o a n y o c c u r r e n c e of a t r u e c h i a s m u s of four t e r m s in a n A B - B ' A ' s t r u c t u r e . Obviously, w h e n t h e r e a r e m o r e t h a n four t e r m s t h e crossed form of t h e figure d i s a p p e a r s . " I n v e r t e d p a r a l l e l i s m " is a H e b r e w p o e t i c form a n d is a l r e a d y well developed in A m o s . Cf. . E . B A I L E Y , " A S t u d y of S o m e L u c a n P a r a b l e s in t h e L i g h t of O r i e n t a l Life a n d P o e t i c S t y l e " ( U n p u b l i s h e d T h . D . T h e s i s ; Concordia S e m i n a r y , St. Louis, 1972), p p . 68-73, 362. N o r b e r t L O H F I N K , Das Hauptgebot: Eine Untersuchung literarischer Einleitungstragen zu Dtn 5 - j j ( R o m e : E Pontificio I n s t i t u t o Biblico, 1963), p p . 67, 182, 195, 214, 233. T h u s t h i s e x t e n d e d inversion of p a r a l l e l lines is p r o p e r l y seen as a t y p e of parallelism w i t h r e l a t i o n s h i p s to Old T e s t a m e n t p o e t r y . 10 ) I n t h e p o e t r y of P a u l , as in o t h e r N e w T e s t a m e n t p o e t r y , t h e s e m a n t i c u n i t c a n b e a single word, a p h r a s e , a full p o e t i c line, or a series of lines, d e p e n d i n g o n t h e p o e m . F o r a wide r a n g e of e x a m p l e s of different t y p e s of s e m a n t i c u n i t s in N e w T e s t a m e n t p o e t r y , cf. B A I L E Y , p p . 59-98.
4

POETIC STRUCTURE OF I COR. I I7-II 2

267

of the three types of parallelisms defined above. The feature that is usually missing is meter. BURNEY U ) and MOWRY 1 2 ) have looked for meter in the New Testament and have found very little. However, the discovery of the Hodayoth of Qumran has introduced a non-metric type of poetry from the New Testament period. THIERING writes :
I t is true t h a t if the reader judges (the Hodayoth) by modern poetic standards, or by the O.T. Psalms, he gains an impression of very poor poetry, characterized by irregular metre, rather weak use of parallelism, frequent and monotonous repetitions of words, and the apparent absence of any firm principle of construction. But when the Hodayoth are examined with the purpose of discovering their own poetic conventions, alien as these may be, it becomes evident t h a t they are written according to strong principles of form, and are in fact more formally constructed than most O.T. poetry 1 3 ) .

Precisely the same statement about the absence of meter can be made regarding most of the poetry in the New Testament. It is a rhyme of ideas that dominates the poetry along with a very sophisticated structure. With these things in mind, the overall structure of the entire poem must now be noted. (cf. Below pages 268 and 269) A series of striking features surface when the poetic structure of the passage is observed. The poem is written with a series of seven semantic units which are then repeated in an inverse order (inverted parallelism). The six outer semantic units (three inverted pairs) are each composed of four lines. Units A and A' relate to each other in step parallelism. Units and B' as well as C and C are internally chiastic and at the same time, match each other also using step parallelism. With one exception (line C-i) the outer two lines of each of these six units are longer than the inner two lines. After the outer envelope of twenty-four, the inner heart of the poem is composed of fourteen lines which form into seven couplets. Then at the very center of the poem (lines G-i and G-2) each line is composed precisely of seven syllables. Thus the number seven is worked into the overall structure three ways.
) C. F. BURNEY, The Poetry of Our Lord (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1925). ) Lucetta MOWRY, "Poetry in the Synoptic Gospels and Revelation" (Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis; Yale, New Haven, Connecticut, 1946). 13 ) Barbara THIERING, "The Poetic Forms of the Hodayoth", Journal of Semitic Studies, VIII (1963), 189.
12 n

. . BAILEY 17-11 2 3 , 4 6 2 2 ' ' , " " ( ) C , 2 , 2 ' , ' , D 2 2 F * 2 ' G 2 F' 2 ' , b ( ") 2 D' 2 c ( , ) C 2 ' ' d ( ' ) e. ( , , , , ' 6 ) ' 2 2' , / ( ) ' ' , " , g ( ) 2 ' , h ( ) 3 4 zi 2

POETIC STRUCTURE OF I COR. I I7-II 2 / Cor. i ij-ii 2 1

269

For Christ did not send me to baptize 2 but to preach the gospel 3 not with wise words 4 lest it be emptied of its power, the cross of Christ 1 For the word of the cross, to those being destroyed, is folly 2 but to us who are being saved 2' it is the power of God 1' For it is written, " I will destroy the wisdom of the wise m e n " a. (and the cleverness of the clever I will thwart) 1 Where is the wise man 2 Where is the scribe 2' Where is the scholar of this age i ' Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world D 1 For since in the wisdom of God 2 The world did not know God through wisdom 1 I t pleased God through the folly of the kerygma 2 To save those who believe F 1 Since Jews demand signs 2 And Greeks seek wisdom G 1 But we preach 2 Christ crucified F ' 1 A stumbling block to Jews 2 And folly to gentiles ' 1 But to those who are called b. (both Jews and Greeks) 2 Christ the power of God and wisdom of God D ' 1 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men 2 And the weakness of God is stronger than men c. (for consider your call brethren) 1 For there are not many wise men according to the flesh 2 Not many powerful 2' Not many of noble birth 1' Yet, the foolishness of the world, God chose to shame the wise men d. (What is weak in the world, God chose to shame the strong) e. (what is low born and despised in the world, God chose even the things t h a t are not, to bring to nothing the things t h a t are) So t h a t all flesh might not boast in the presence of God 2 From him you are in Christ Jesus 2' Who became wisdom for us from God. /. (which is righteous ness, santification and redemption) i ' Therefore it is written, " L e t him who boasts, boast in the Lord". And I came to you g. (brethren I came) 2 Not in lofty words h. (or wisdom) 3 Proclaiming to you the testimony of God 4 For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him Crucified.

270

. . BAILEY

It is conceivable that the double use of the number twelve in the outer sections of the poem is insignificant. The triple use of number seven cannot be by chance. Some of the semantic units relate in very specific ways to the units that precede and follow them. These relationships will be examined in the discussion of the units themselves. Finally, the climax of a poem of this type is always the center which is then reinforced by repetition at the beginning and at the end 1 4 ). This feature is observable here. The center is a double line which reads:
Unit A includes : Unit A' has : G-i G-2 A-2 A-4 A'-3 A'~4 we preach Christ crucified. to evangelize Lest it be emptied of its power, the cross of Christ Proclaiming to you the testimony of God For I decided to know. . . Jesus Christ and him crucified

So the proclamation of Christ crucified occurs at the beginning, the middle, and the end of the poem and forms its climax. The poem has eight comments and expansions that will be examined in turn. Finally, the overall flow of ideas in the poem can be reduced to the following :
A I preach the cross Those being destroyed We who are being saved C The wise man (the scholars) made foolish I) God's wisdom and man's ignorance E The kerygma saves believers F Jews and Greek reject G We preach the cross F' Jews and Gentiles reject E' Christ is power and wisdom for the called D' God's wisdom and man's weakness C The wise men (the strong) shamed B' Those who boast You who are in Christ preach the cross

A'

With these various features in mind, each pair of semantic units must now be examined.
) My own research has isolated this feature in thirty-four passages scattered all through the New Testament, not to mention the Hodayoth of Qumran and the classical prophets of the Old Testament. For a partial description of some of these cf. BAILEY, pp. 59-98.
14

POETIC STRUCTURE OF I COR. I I7-II 2

271

Units A and A'

Unit A 1 2 For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel 3 not with wise words 4 lest it be emptied of its power, the cross of Christ

Unit A'

And I came to you brethern, (I came) 2 not in lofty words (or wisdom) 15 3 proclaiming to you the testimony ) of God 4 For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified 1 6 ).

Both "testimony" and "mystery" are well attested in the textual tra dition. The NESTLE text selects the first while the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament prefers the second. In defense of "mystery" as the preferred text METZGER writes, " T h e reading seems to be a recollection of 1.6, whereas here prepares for its usage in ver. 7." Bruce E. METZGER, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, a Companion volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (Third edition; London: United Bible Societies, 1971), p. 545. However, this judgment needs reconsideration in the light of the poetic structure. The relationship t h a t needs to influence the selection of the text is neither i 6 nor ii 8 but rather the corresponding line in unit A which reads, " t o preach the gospel." Thus "testimony" is clearly the preferred word. BARRETT gives additional reasons for "testimony" as he writes, "The balance of probability favours testimony, (a) because mystery is in the context (ii.7, cf. iv.i) and could have affected a copyist subconsciously, and (b) because testimony is more suitable to the initial proclamation of the Gospel, whereas mystery suggests the wisdom Paul was able to speak among mature Christians (ii.6)." C. K. BARRETT, A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians (London: Adam and Charles BLACK, 1968), pp. 62-63. 16 ) Line Ar-4 is unusually long. There is the possibility t h a t this is intended to be two lines both in units A and A'. This would make ' 'not be emptied' ' parallel to " n o t to know." The semantic correspondence between them is weak but there is an auditory correspondence. That is, sounds somewhat like . The consonants of the first word are " k " with " n " (a liquid), and the con sonants of the second are " k " with two liquids, one of them also " n . " How ever, a number of arguments can be marshalled against dividing Unes A-4 and A'-4. Among these are: (1) Line A'-4 alone is unusually long and not A-4; (2) The entire poem is working with units of two and four lines and it seems unlikely t h a t a five line unit was intended; (3) There are nu merous examples in the Hodayoth of unusually long Unes used in parallel with shorter ones; (4) I t is most likely t h a t Paul intends "preaching" and the "cross" as the final Unes of units A and A' because in step parallelism the climax of the stanza always occurs at the end of the series. (This is be cause it is at this point t h a t the series begins to repeat. I t is for this same reason t h a t the climax of inverted parallelism is at the center.) This intention of Paul's is demonstrated by the selection of "preaching" and "cross" as the climax of the entire poem. If lines A-4 and A'-4 are each divided into two Unes, the balance between the three occurrences of "preaching" and "cross" is disturbed. (There is also the possibility t h a t line A'-4 is expanded but if so, the expansion is not evident.) Finally, (5) my own research has isolated

15

272

. . BAILEY

The four ideas in each unit are : 1 2 The coming of Paul not with wise words 3 preaching 4 the cross of Christ

Unit A' preserves the above order. Unit A, however, has the two center lines in reverse order. I t is clear t h a t Unit A' has the original order because the center of the poem (Unit G), as we have seen, also presents the same last two lines only in shorter form, namely 'preaching'' and then " t h e cross/' Thus Unit A has lines 2 and 3 reversed. The reason for this is clear. The verses which immediately precede the poem are on the topic of baptism. The first line of the poem has been rewritten to provide a smooth transition from the discussion of baptism to the poem. The original order was most likely as follows : A 1 For Christ sent me, 2 not with wise words 3 to proclaim the gospel 4 lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

Then a negative is added to the first line with a reference to baptism. With this addition, Unit A becomes meaningless. It reads like this: For Christ did not send me to baptize not with eloquent wisdom but to preach the gospel lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power. The problem was easily solved by reversing lines two and three which gives the text as it now stands. The editing of the Greek sentence was easy. The line is as follows: ( ) () could have been added to the front and to the end. The question naturally arises as to who did the smoothing of the transition from the discussion of baptism to the poem. No answer can be given with certainty. In such a case attention must be focused on probability, not possibility. There are two obvious alternatives. Either Paul himself shifted the poetic lines for the transition or they are the work of a later editor. In this case, it a second case of an extended final line in a Pauline poem in Romans. For these reasons both units will be left as four line units.

POETIC STRUCTURE OF I COR. I I7-II 2

273

seems more probable that the transition is made by St. Paul him self. The shifting is minimal and seems to have been done with a sensitivity to the internal balance of unit A which is not dis turbed 1 7 ). Furthermore, it is natural to assume that the author himself wants to provide a thoughtful transition from one section of such an epistle to another. Presumably this would be especially true near the beginning of the letter 1 8 ). If this is adopted as the most plausible alternative of the two, then we are obliged to assume that the entire poem was composed prior to the writing of first Corinthians and then re-worked for the Corinthian correspond ence 1 9 ). Thus, in summary, units A and A' mirror each other with the themes of "send," "not with wisdom," "preach" and "the cross." Unit A has been slightly modified to tie it to the previous discus sion of baptism. Units and B' Units and B' each have four lines. Each unit is internally chiastic. At the same time each matches the other following a step parallelistic pattern. These units are:
17

) T h i s b a l a n c e is chiastic a n d is a s follows : 1 Christ 2 t h e gospel 2 n o t wise w o r d s Christ

I n s p i t e of t h i s chiastic b a l a n c e , w e prefer t o list t h i s u n i t a s s t e p p a r a l l e l i s m b e c a u s e a l t h o u g h Christ is m e n t i o n e d a t t h e b e g i n n i n g a n d a t t h e end, y e t t h e r e is a s t r o n g progression from t h e o n e t o t h e o t h e r . T h e first c o n c e n t r a t e s o n sending, t h e second o n t h e cross. T h e b a l a n c i n g u n i t (A') is n o t c h i a s t i c .

) I t could then be argued, if Paul himself did the rearranging of Unit A, why did he not rearrange Unit A' in the same fashion which could easily have been done with no disturbing of the sense ? The answer to this is in the oc currence of "preaching" and " t h e cross" together as the climax of the poem. These two themes still appear together both in the center and at the end. If for the sake of a smooth transition Paul must sacrifice the first of these three, he does not want to lose the third. This is because the proximity of these two themes in the center and at the end is more important than the disturbance of a balance between lines in units A and A' which are spatially a long way apart in the poem. That is, Paul does not want to disturb the cli max of the poem. 19 ) The poem itself, with its editorial comments, opens the question of who were the original intended readers of such a sophisticated poem. Even a suggestion of an answer can be made only after the entire poem is examined.
18

18

274 Unit

. . BAILEY For the word of the cross, to those being destroyed, is folly 2 But to us who are being saved 2' I t is the power of God i ' For it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise" a. (and the cleverness of the clever I will thwart) So t h a t all flesh might not boast in the presence of God 2 From him you are in Christ Jesus 2' Who became wisdom for us from God /. (which is right eousness, sanctification and redemption) i ' Therefore it is written, "Let him who boasts, boast in the Lord"20). 1

Unit '

Unit has two parallelistic couplets. The semantic relationships in the outside couplet of unit are strong. In it the "word" paral lels " I t is written/' "those being destroyed" matches " I will destroy," and "folly" is paired with "wisdom." The inner couplet is semantically weak with only "salvation" = "the power of God." Line B-2' simply finishes the sentence. Yet at the same time the center two are positive in contrast to the outside pair which are negative 2 1 ). The weakness of the semantic relationship between these twO lines is compensated by end rhyme and a near perfect balance in syllable count 2 2 ). The most striking feature of unit is the fact that a negative is set out in the first line (B'-i), "those being destroyed," which is then answered with an Old Testament quotation in the matching line (B'-i'), " I will destroy" 2 3 ).
) Step parallelism is used only at the outside of the poem. The rest of the units use other parallelistic devices. This specific feature re-occurs in a poem in Romans. I t is either a special Pauline device or a poetic con vention t h a t he has taken over and used. 21 ) The clear parallels in this case are between units and B' because lines B-2 and B-2' match lines B'-2 and B/-2/. Cf. page 12. 22 ) rhymes with . Line B'-2 has eight syllables and B'-2' seven. 23 ) The redactor knew the Old Testament verse in its entirety and finding the first half of the couplet, added the second half. However, comment a. is clearly secondary. This is because (1) comment a. adds nothing to the argument and at the same time destroys the four line balance of the unit. Furthermore, (2) unit B' has the identical form of a negative in the first line t h a t is then answered by an Old Testament quote in the fourth line. There in unit B' the Old Testament quote is a single line and we must assume t h a t the concluding line of unit was also originally a single line. (3) Line B-2' is from the LXX, while comment a. deviates from the LXX. Finally, (4) the outer units of this poem are tied together in a very precise manner. A theme at the end of one unit is repeated at the beginning of the following unit. Thus "cross" occurs at the end of unit A and is repeated at the begin ning of unit B. In like manner, "wise m e n " occurs at the end of unit and is taken up at the beginning of Unit C. This requires that comment a. be understood as secondary.
20

POETIC STRUCTURE OF I COR. I I7-II 2

275

Paul states his main theme in the first unit (A, A') and then in the second unit appears a double Old Testament witness (, B'). This pattern of quoting an Old Testament witness immediately after the statement of the central theme occurs in a similar poetic structure in Acts ii 23-36 2 4 ) . The matching unit (B') has the identical themes. These can be seen as follows :
Unit Those being destroyed 2 those being saved 2' the power of God 1' " I will destroy" Unit B' 1 Those who boast 2 you in Christ 2' the wisdom of God i ' "Boast in the Lord"

In both cases Paul sets up a negative image in the first line and then answers it with an Old Testament quotation in the last. The inner lines match their opposites in the other unit with precision. This second unit B' has a number of striking features that warrant observation. First of these is the explanatory commentary in line 2'. The line as it now stands reads literally as follows: "Who became wisdom for us from God, righteousness, and sanctification and redemption/' It is our contention that the three words at the end are in apposition and are intended to be an explanation of the word " wisdom/ ' What is this * 'wisdom/ ' which is for us from God? It is "righteousness, sanctification and redemption/' The traditional pattern of translation gives all four words in a single list. This is inadequate for at least eight reasons. First is the matter of line length. In this particular poetical structure, Paul uses twelve sets of parallel lines in six units to form the outside frame of the poem. With the one exception of C-i and C-2, the inner lines are shorter than the outer 2 ). The identification of comment/, as secondary restores line B'-2' to the same line length balance which already occurs ten and perhaps eleven times out of twelve in these six units. Second, "wisdom" is not listed with "righteousness, sanctification and redemption/' Rather three other words intervene. Third, the last three words are connected by the crucial particles " ". BLASS discusses this particular combination of particles and observes, "The correlative comes as a rule after the first
24

) Cf. B A I L E Y , p p . 88 f.

) This pattern is standard for Paul. My own research has isolated this phenomenon again and again in the poetic structures occurring in the Pauline letters. For three examples, cf. BAILEY, p. 368. I t is also possible t h a t C-i and C-2 are not an exception to this Une length pattern. Cf. p. 15, n. 34.

25

276

. . BAILEY
26

word of the pair t h a t is to be correlated" ) . There is no case in the entire New Testament where or . . . occurs in the middle of a series or after two items in a list. However, is often used after the first item of an explanatory phrase which stands in apposition to something already stated. BLASS observes this phenomenon in Luke xxii 66 which reads, " T h e elders of the people gathered together, both chief priests and scribes." This last phrase, "chief priests and scribes," is joined in the Greek text by . The class of men involved are mentioned as "elders." The additional phrase with is then in apposition to "elders" and provides a further breakdown in classification to explain who the elders were. A Pauline example of this usage is in Romans i 12. Paul speaks of "each other's faith" and then adds, "yours mine." There are examples of this appositional usage of in a wide range of New Testament books 2 7 ). This appositional use of is already recognized in line E'-i and fits admirably into unit B'. The poem mentions Christ "who became wisdom for us from God." This wisdom is then defined as "righteousness, sanctification and redemp tion." Fourth, when comment /. is bracketed at a secondary comment, the poetic balance of the four lines is restored. This is particularly evident when the final phrases of each of the four lines are examined. These become:
' 1 2 2' i' I n t h e p r e s e n c e of God I n Christ Jesus from G o d I n the Lord

Furthermore, (fifth), lines 2 and 2' evidence an internal chiasmus. This is :

2 2f from h i m (God) in Christ w h o h a s b e c o m e (Christ) from G o d

Sixth, this phrase, as it now stands in the text, is left hanging with 28 no connective to the rest of the sentence ). The oriental versions
26 ) F . B L A S S a n d A. D E B R U N N E R , A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, t r a n s l a t e d from t h e G e r m a n b y R. W . F U N K (Chicago: T h e U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago Press, 1961), p . 230 ( # 4 4 4 ) . B L A S S m a k e s clear t h a t t h e e x c e p t i o n t o t h i s is w h e n t h e r e is a p r e p o s i t i o n a t t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h e list a n d in t h a t case, occurs before t h e first i t e m in t h e list. 27 ) Cf. M a t t , x x i i 1 1 ; L u k e x v 2; xxii 6 6 ; xxiii 12; A c t s ii 9; ii 10; iv 27; 14; 24; 3 9 ; x i x 19; x i x 17; R o m a n s i 12; i 16; ii 9; ii 19; I I Cor. xii 12; Phil, i 7; H e b . ii 11 ; R e v . x i x 18. 28 ) W h e n c o m m e n t /. is r e a d as a n a p p o s i t i o n a l p h r a s e , n o c o n n e c t i v e is necessary.

POETIC STRUCTURE OF I COR. I I7-II 2

277

from the Peshitta on add a connective to form a list of four. Codex G and a number of other manuscripts (presumably assuming that all four key words formed a single list) felt obliged to add an extra to draw comment/, into the sentence. Also (seven), the transla tion of the original line is distorted when the extra words are incorporated. From the chiastic structure of lines B'-2 and B'-2' noted above, it is clear that in B'-2' should be translated normally "from God" rather than the "by God" which occurs in most modern English translations. Finally (eight), the three themes of righteousness, sanctification and redemption are nowhere hinted at in the entire poem and stand out in theological isolation from it. With these observations in mind, it becomes clear that comment /. is redactional and not a part of the original composition 29 ). Thus in conclusion, unit B' mirrors unit both in form and content. Units C and C These units are also composed in the ABBA form. In this case we are conditioned by the traditional understanding of the passage which in turn is influenced by the additional comments attached to unit C. Yet the original form is intact and clear. Unit C can be translated:
C Where is the wise man 2 Where is the scribe 2' Where is the scholar of this age 3 0 ) i ' Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world ? 1

2e ) In this case the additional appositional list is a theologically profound comment on the nature of Christ, the wisdom from God. Again, it is not pos sible to determine precisely who added the explanatory comment. Yet for Paul, righteousness, sanctification and redemption are gifts of God in Christ to the believer. Thus the comment is in harmony with specifics of Pauline theology. Furthermore, the appositional outside of the book of Acts is most common in the uncontested Pauline letters, (cf. note 31) Thus it seems most probable t h a t Paul himself is the author of this comment. If this can be supposed, we have additional evidence of the reuse of an old poem. 30 ) There may be a primitive error in unit C and the phrase "of this age" may have been moved accidentally from C-i to C-2' as follows: C 1 Where is the wise man ( I ) 2 Where is the scribe I 2' Where is the scholar (of this age)

In units C and C as they now stand, three out of the four occurrences of wisdom/wise men are qualified by some mention of this world (cf. C-i', C'-i, C'-i'). If the phrase "of this age" (now in line C-2') is restored to lineC-i, all four references to wisdom would balance. At the same time, three out of the

278

. . BAILEY

Setting aside for t h e moment t h e secondary elements in unit C , the poetic unit itself is as follows :
C Not many are wise men according to the flesh 2 not many powerful 2' not many of noble birth 1' Yet, the foolishness of the world, God chose to shame the wise men.

Unit C, like unit before it, has an ABBA pattern. Line 1 begins with the wise man. His wisdom is " m a d e foolish" in line 1/. The inner couplet of this unit is best understood as two specific types of t h e "wise m e n " mentioned at the beginning of t h e unit. The scribe is the wise man of the Jews and the scholar represents the wise man of the Greeks. Jew and Greek are contrasted twice in the center of the poem and that same contrast occurs here. SCHNEI DER writes :
U. WILCKENS, Weisheit u. Torheit (1959), 28 rightly argues that one may see from v. 22 that in v. 20a Paul uses two other terms in development of , the one () denoting Jewish theology and the other ( ) Greek philosophy31).

The poetic form reinforces SCHNEIDER'S contention in support of WILCKENS t h a t Paul uses t h e two extra terms in ' 'development of ' ' 3 2 ) . The question then arises as t o why Paul avoided the
four particularized references in the inner couplets (scribe, scholar, powerful and noble born) do not have prepositional appendages. Such an extra phrase occurs only in C-2'. Thus returning the phrase "of this age" to line C-i would restore a second set of balances between the two units. Thus it seems quite likely that this phrase originally stood in line C-i. This possibility is rein forced by the wording of ii 6 which reads, "We do impart a wisdom, although it is not a wisdom of this age" If we presuppose the above primitive error, then where Paul discusses the positive aspects of wisdom in ii 6, he makes it clear that this new discussion does not contradict the discussion of wisdom in the larger poem. The reason for the error may have merely been a case of the scribe's eye catching only the first syllable of each of the two words and and attaching the phrase to the wrong word. 31 ) J . S C H N E I D E R , ", , ," Theological Diction ary of New Testament, edited by G. GREIDRICH, translated and edited by G. W. BROMILEY (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Erdmans, 1971), VII, p. 48, n. 3. 32 ) The word has the literal meaning of "examine with" and includes "discuss/' "dispute," and "ponder." (Ibid) The root without the preposition () is a "technical term for philosophical investigation." H. GREEVEN, "" TDNT, Vol. II, 893. The Syriac Peshitta has rcoln which carries the meaning of scholar as well as debater. Arabic versions through the centuries have preferred scholar. Typical of them is the London Polyglot which reads, *y>jjl li* ^^>JC^A. A ninth century Arabic version reads jJUl * ^-^dU. An Arabic Version of the Epistles of St. Paul to the

POETIC STRUCTURE OF I COR. I I7-II 2

279

word ' 'philosopher'' and chose, or perhaps even created, this hapax legomonon (). The reason is most probably poetical. Paul wants the lines of unit C to match unit C and in this case, uses an auditory correspondence to reinforce the semantic. Thus he chooses the rare to rhyme with . This makes the thrust of unit C as follows :
Where is the wise man 2 Where is the scribe (the wise man of the Jewish community) 2' Where is the scholar (the wise man of the Greek community) i ' Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world ? 1

Line 1/ very adequately balances line and at the same time answers the questions of lines 2 and 2' 3 3 ). Unit C is totally negative and makes the point that man's finest intellectual efforts are made foolish by God. Moving to unit C we observe that it also is chiastic. The outer couplet of its ABBA structure is likewise wisdom in general and the inner couplet lists the specifics. However in this case the inner couplet concentrates on power rather than wisdom. When the two units are seen together, both the similarities and the differences can be observed. These are :
C C God and knowledge Wise man Scribe Scholar Wisdom made foolish C God and power Wise men Powerful Nobly born Wise men made foolish

The nearly identical nature of the outer couplets is obvious. The question becomesis there an intentional relationship between the inner couplets ? Perhaps. At least from the days of Ben Sirach through to the destruction of Jerusalem the scribes in the Jewish community were a powerful class. Were not the scholars of the 34 Greek community usually from the aristocracy ? ) At the same time there is a shift of emphasis between the two units. The topic in the upper unit is God and knowledge while the lower unit shifts
Romans, Corinthians, Galatians from a Ninth Century Ms. in the Convent of St. Catherine on Mount Sinai, edited by M. D. GIBSON (London: Cambridge University Press, 1894). LUTHER translated with Weltweisen. With this in mind, we prefer a translation of scholar to the traditional debater. 83 ) The closing line of unit C does not round out t h a t unit with the same precision. This may have led to comment d as we will observe. Cf. p. 22-33. 84 ) There may be an auditory correspondence t h a t reinforces the semantic relationships between these two units. may be intended to catch the ear and relate to .

28

. . BAILEY

to God and power. The double emphasis in the overall theme of ''Christ, the wisdom and power of God" is thus reflected in this pair of units. Stripped of its redactional comments, unit C like C before it states clearly that the cross is the wisdom of God which shames the wise and powerful. When read as part of the argument comments c.t d., ancU. can obscure this message. The original message of unit C will be examined first and then the secondary comments studied in turn. The key line of unit C is the final line (C'-i') which reads, "Yet the foolishness (neut.) of the world God chose to shame the wise men" (mase). The entire poem up to this point informs the reader that God overcomes the wisdom of the world with the cross. This line tells us that God chose the foolish things (neut. pi.), namely the cross, to shame the wise men (mase. pi.). The neuter plural (the foolish things) can most naturally be understood to mean "the things of the cross" 3 5 ). This understanding has been blurred by a failure to see that comment c. is a parenthetical prophetic warning in the form of a direct vocative appeal to the Corinthian readers. Rather comment c. has been read as an introduction to what follows. The comment reads, "for consider your call brethren." This line is best considered secondary for a number of reasons, (i)
35 ) The traditional understanding of the line is to accept the neuter plural as referring to people along with the mase, plural. Thus BLASS writes, "The neuter is sometimes used with reference to persons if it is not the individual but a general quality that is to be emphasized". BLASS-DEBRUNNER, p. 174 [# 138, 1). However, BLASS gives no illustration from the New Testament of a neiter plural referring to persons aside from this verse with the possible exception of in Gal. iii 22. ROBERTSON discussed the same use of the neuter singular as a designation for persons. Significantly he also has only this passage as an illustration of the neuter plural referring to people. Cf. A. T. ROBERTSON, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (Nashville: Broadman Press, c. 1934), 4 1 1 If then refers to the cross, why is it plural ? I t is possible that this is a case of the plural which denotes "mysterious powers." Cf. BLASS, p. 77 (# 141). Much more likely we have here a case of a poetic plural. BLASS writes, " T h e plural of abstract expressions frequently serves in poetry and in (elevated ?) prose in a way foreign to us as a designation of concrete pheno mena." BLASS, p. 78 (#142). This passage is highly poetical. Reading as a poetic plural would reinforce the suggestions t h a t what Paul intends is the events of the cross which the world calls foolish. BLASS himself suggests t h a t the plural in this verse is used to specifically avoid relating the foolish ness of this line (C'-i') to the foolishness of God (sing.) in line D'-i. But the inner relationships between units D ' and C (cf. p. 20) demand such a re lationship.

POETIC STRUCTURE OF I COR. I 17-II 2

281

Comment c. and line C'-i each begin with a causative particle. Literally it reads :
c. C'-i for look to your call brethren because not many are wise according to the flesh

Most modern English translations find it necessary to omit the , of line C'-i to solve the problem of this doubling of particles. Furthermore, (2) this comment clearly interrupts the overall structure of the poem, which has three four-line units both at the beginning and at the end. Also, (3) the pattern of relationships between units D' and C is broken by comment c. This pattern of connectives is similarly used to link units C and D, and must now be examined. In the case of units C and D, the first line of D repeats the themes of the outer couplet of C and the second line of D takes up what is mentioned in the inner couplet of C. This can be seen diagrammatically as follows : 3)
C Wise man 2 Scribe 2' Scholar 1' Wisdom 1 D 1 2 Wisdom of God The world did not know

Units C and D' have the identical pattern 3 7 ). We observe:

C Wise man 2 Powerful 2' Noble born 1' Wise men 1 D' 1 2 God is wiser God is stronger

This remarkably precise pattern twice repeated indicates very clearly that C is a continuation of what is set out in D'. Thus in the original poem, after unit D', the discussion did not shift to the call of the Christian (comment c.) but repeated the themes of wisdom and power. Finally (4), the topic of the Christian's calling is dealt with in unit E' and is mirrored in unit E. A return to the topic of calling (between units D' and C) identifies comment c. as secondary.
) These relationships can also be identified by observing the numbers. Each line numbered " 1 " is on the subject of "wisdom." Each line numbered "2" is on the topic of "knowledge." 37 ) In units D and D ' the poem shifts from the outer section of twenty-four lines in six units to the inner section of fourteen lines in seven units. This may be the reason Paul has so tightly linked units C and C with D and D'.
36

282

. . BAILEY

With these four reasons in mind, we must now observe the double confusion that results when comment c. is considered a part of the original argument. First is the tense of line C'-i. The call of God to the Corinthians was prior to Paul's writing. This may be why a number of major modern translations have put line D'-i in the past. Typical of these is The Revised Standard Version which reads, "Not many of you were wise according to worldly standards. . ." 3 8 ). However, there is no verb in line C'-i and the verb in line D'-i is present tense. Thus the original time of the line was present tense and it should be translated "not many are wise." This matter of time is minor but the second point of confusion is of major signifi cance. (2) When seen as a part of the argument, comment c. makes the Corinthians, not the cross, the instrument of God for shaming the wise 3 9 ). This new emphasis specifically gives the Corinthian reader a very good reason to boast. If the Corinthian reader is himself the agent of God (although weak and ignobly born) for the shaming of the strong and powerful, then he can easily boast in his exalted status as God's instrument. This new emphasis caused by reading comment c. a s a part of the argument is in direct contradiction to the next unit of the poem (B') which says that God has done this so that "all flesh might not boast/' It is not necessary to make disparaging judgments about the motivation or intelligence of the author of this comment. If com ment, c. is read as parenthetical, the inner theological consistency of the poem is restored and the intent of the comment is recovered. This comment occurs between two units that are totally negative. It stands as a prophetic warning to the reader lest he forget his call, begin to boast and end up shamed by the cross as the world is shamed 4 0 ). This line should be read as a parenthetical vocative 41 address to the reader, not as a part of the argument ). The entire
38

) Cf. also Jerusalem

Bible a n d Today's

English

Version.

) The text has been read in this fashion for a long time. The Peshitta adds ^^^3 (of you) to the text three times. The Greek text has no prepositions or pronouns. All the major modern English versions follow in the same pattern and add of you to the references to wise, powerful and nobly born. These include RSV, NEB, NAB, JB, and TEV. 40 ) The placement of comment c. between units D' and C also relates to the double inversion that this poem exhibits, which is discussed below. Cf. 33-34 41 ) The second half of Peter's poetically constructed speech at Pentecost

39

POETIC STRUCTURE OF I COR. I 17-II 2

283

poem tells us t h a t the cross shames the wise, not the Corinthians. Thus for grammatical, poetical, and theological reasons, comment c. must be bracketed as a parenthetical comment. Comments d. and e. must now be examined. I t is impossible to second guess the author(s) of comments d. and e. with any finality. However, we can establish t h a t these comments are secondary to the original poem and most likely composed by different people. Each comment will need careful examination. To understand comment d. it is necessary to observe it in the progression of ideas from unit D ' to C . As observed above, this progression is : D' 1 The foolishness of God is wiser than men 2 The weakness of God is stronger than men C 1 Wise men 2 Powerful men 2' Men of noble birth 1 ' Foolish things chosen by God to shame wise men d. weak things chosen by God to shame strong things In the first half of the poem, we noted t h a t the two themes in unit C reappeared in unit D. Here also two themes appear in D \ These are : (i) the foolishness of God (the cross) is wiser than men, and (2) the weakness of God (the cross) is stronger t h a n men. The first of these is clearly represented in unit C (cf. lines and i') The second is implied by semantic relationships between units C and C . The poetically informed reader knows t h a t the powerful and noble of unit C are in fact the scribes and scholars of unit C and thus these powerful and noble are spoken to in line C'-i' when Paul concludes unit C with ''foolish things God chose to shame the wise men. , , B u t the reader who does not see the poetry will assume t h a t the second theme of unit D ' (God is stronger t h a n men) is not represented in unit C and the mention of the powerful and noble is left dangling. The author of comment d. picks u p the ideas in the second line of unit D ' (weakness and strength). He is not repeating or answering the mention of "powerful m e n " in line C-2. If he were, he would use to answer to in line C-2. Thus the author of comment d. clearly understands the poetic structure of these units. Furthermore, line C - i is itself a poetic line with inverted parallelism. This is as follows: has two similar ejaculatory addresses to the listener/reader which are not a part of the theological argument. Cf. BAILEY, pp. 88-90.

284

. . BAILEY

The foolish things of the world He chose God did in order to shame the wise men

God is the climax in the center. As often occurs in inverted paral lelism, there is a point of turning just past the center. The second half of an inverted structure is not redundant but introduces some crucial new element. This feature is prominent in this line with the ' as t h e pivotal point of turning. The "shaming of the wise" occurs at the end of the line and becomes the connective between this unit and unit B' which starts with "all flesh might not boast." Wisdom and foolishness are paired on the outside and the two verbs stand opposite to one another as the two actions of God. Comment d. then has the same inverted parallelism and also con cludes with a reference to the key word shame which preserves the tie with unit B'. Neuter plurals are used so that the reader will clearly relate the comment to line D'-2 and the cross. Thus it can be said t h a t the comment is perhaps slightly redundant but yet necessary for any reader who misses the poetry. The author of the comment clearly knows what he is doing poetically in relation to the poem and the new reader. I t seems most likely t h a t the author of this comment is St. Paul himself and that the comment is added to help the Corinthians understand a poem composed earlier for readers of a different culture. Comment e., however, brings us into a world t h a t contrasts sharply poetically and theologically from the rest of the poem. The author of this comment has not understood the poem at large. He sees only five ideas which he assumes need a sixth. He reads the text with the additional comment d. and sees them as follows :
Wise men Powerful men Noble birth () Wise men shamed Strong things shamed ?

d.

He adds comment e. Ignoble birth () . . . This redactor misses the fact t h a t comment d. (strong) does not answer to ' 'powerful m e n " and he tries to round out what he assumes to be a triple reference only partially completed. The new comment (e.) loses the reference to shame at the end and thus the continuity with the next unit is damaged. The internal poetic structure is also lost.

POETIC STRUCTURE OF I COR. I 17-II 2

285

The comment becomes verbose with the addition of "and the despised/' But most of all, it is philosophically abstract with vague references to "things that exist" and "things that do not exist." Indeed, this comment sounds very much like the very speculative wisdom that is under attack in the entire poem 42 ). It is only natural to find secondary comments in the Pauline letters. Time and time again in the synoptic material, criticism has isolated the redactional additions of early Christian preachers. This same church had the letters of Paul as a part of its tradition. Is it not reasonable to assume that all of the church's traditional material, both written and oral, was treated in a somewhat similar fashion? Can it not thus be suggested that in comment e. we have a note or notes from early Christian preaching which have been added to the text ? One has the distinct feeling that this comment has its own history in the first and second centuries and is most likely a combination of a number of comments by various Greek preachers now unknown. After an awareness of the poetic nature of the material was lost, comments c. along with d. and e.t together crystalized the shift from cross to Corinthians as the foolishness of God instrumental in shaming the wise. In summary, unit C has four chiastically arranged lines which center around the theme of the cross as the wisdom (and power) of God used to shame the wise and powerful. Unit C relates very specifically to C in the upper half of the structure and to D' which immediately precedes it. Shaming the wise concludes unit C and leads into the first line of unit B' with its reference to not boasting. Prior to the unit, there is an imperative prophetic warning (comment c). One of the poetic nuances is reinforced with an additional line (comment d.). An abstract philosophical comment is finally appended (comment e). Before proceeding to the center of the poem with its fourteen lines in seven units, it is important to note how Paul links the outer units together. We have observed the connectives between units C and D. He also joins A, B, and C and their counterparts in C, B', and A'. The technique used is to take the theme mentioned at the end of the last line of one unit and then repeat it in the first
) This last observation was made to me by my colleague Dr. Kenneth THOMAS of the Near East School of Theology extension program in Tehran, Iran.
42

286

. . BAILEY

line of the following unit. Paul manages this in each case but one. Diagrammatically this can be observed as follows : Unit A C C B' A' The beginning The end The beginning The end The beginning The end The beginning The end The beginning The end The beginning The end I was sent The cross of Christ The word of the cross The wise men The wise man The wisdom of the world The wise men according to the flesh The wise men shamed All flesh cannot boast Boast in the Lord I came ( ? ? ? ? ) Christ crucified

Unit A ends with the cross and unit then begins with a similar reference. Unit ends with wise men and unit C starts with them. C ends with the wisdom of the world which links with wise men according to the flesh in C . Unit C ends with a reference to shamed and unit B' begins with the comment t h a t all flesh cannot boast. It is only the connection between Unit B' and A' t h a t is not ce mented by such a reference. This failure was unfortunate. Probably because of this loose connection, there is a paragraph division in the Codex Vaticanus and a chapter break in the English Bible. I t is just possible t h a t Paul tried to compensate for the lack of a semantic relationship to join the two stanzas by substituting an auditory connection. The word is relatively rare in Paul and the last line of unit B ' reads " " which gives some thing of an auditory relationship with at the beginning of unit A ' 4 3 ) . The center of the poem is composed of seven two line units **). Units D-G Units D and D ' appear as follows:
) W e will o b s e r v e l a t e r in t h e discussion (pp. 34 f.) t h a t line A ' - i h a s b e e n re-edited. I t is j u s t possible t h a t a r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e e n d of u n i t B ' a n d t h e b e g i n n i n g of A ' e x i s t e d in t h e earliest form of t h e p o e m a n d m a y h a v e said s o m e t h i n g like " A n d t h e L o r d s e n t m e , " w h i c h would u n i t e t h e line e v e n m o r e closely w i t h t h e b a l a n c i n g line a t t h e v e r y b e g i n n i n g of t h e p o e m , a s well as t y i n g A ' t o t h e p r e c e d i n g u n i t in a fashion similar t o t h e o t h e r c o n n e c t i n g links b e t w e e n t h e four line u n i t s . H o w e v e r , w i t h n o t e x t u a l evidence, s u c h s p e c u l a t i o n c a n n o t b e given w e i g h t . 44 ) I am indepted to Mr. Nabeel JABBOUR of Beirut for first drawing my
43

attention to the poetic structure of these fourteen lines.

POETIC STRUCTURE OF I COR. I I7-II 2 D D' For since the wisdom of God The world did not know God through wisdom For the foolishness of God is wiser than men And the weakness of God is stronger than men

287

The general theme of the world and God's wisdom unites these two units. Each unit deals with an aspect of this single theme and the two are like two sides of one coin. The one says, "man cannot know God," and the other, "God's lowest is above man's high 4 est" ) . We have noted the remarkable relationships between units C and D as well as C and D'. There is also a unifying theme which ties units D and E to E' and D'. This can be seen as follows:
D E E' D' The wisdom of God (and the world) The folly of God's kerygma (and the saved) The wisdom of God (and the saved) The foolishness of God (and the world)

Thus the cross is referred to as folly and as wisdom, both for the saved and the world, using the very precise pattern of wisdomfolly-wisdom-folly 4 e ). In units E and E' there is a return to the positive 47 ). These units are as follows :
E' 1 2 2 1 I t pleased God through the folly of the kerygma To save those who believe But to those who are called b. (both Jews and Greeks) Christ, the power of God and wisdom of God

In this double couplet there is a chiasmus between the four lines. Those who believe (E-2) are those who are called (E'-2) **) and the kerygma (-i) is Christ, the power of God and wisdom of God (E'-i). As in unit C, unit E' has an explanatory comment most probably from the same hand. Again we have a appositional phrase. The poem mentions ''those who are called;" then in apposition
45 ) I t is possible to relate these two units in step parallelism. This would bring " t h e wisdom of God" parallel to " t h e foolishness of God" in the first Unes, and " t h e world's wisdom" opposite to " t h e world's strength" in the second lines. This second parallelism is weak and identifying the two units through a single theme seems more appropriate. 4e ) These units are also linked by the double inversion poetic device examined below. Cf. p. 32. 47 ) The theme of "those who are being saved" was last mentioned in unit B, C and D are both negative. 48 ) The syllable count of these two lines is significantly close. Line E-2 has seven syllables in Greek while E'-2 has six.

288

. . BAILEY

to this comes the explanatory comment, " b o t h Jews and Greeks/' The appositional comment protects Paul from any accusation of racial favoritism. The ''called'' are not exclusively from any party. The poem climaxes with units F, G and F ' . A translation with a syllable count of the Greek text appears as follows : F 2 Since Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom G 1 But we preach 2 Christ crucified 1 A stumbling block to Jews 2 And folly to gentiles 13 10 7 7 7 7

F'

Relationships between F and F ' return to step parallelism. These same units each exhibit the power-wisdom themes because signs need power and the Greeks seek their own wisdom. The seventh unit in the very center is the fact that four out of the six lines have precisely seven syllables. The third couplet (unit F) has a clear end rhyme t h a t artistically compensates for the lack of a precise syl lable balance. This end rhyme is as follows 4 9 ) : F 1 . . . 2 . . .

The reduction of the central lines to precisely seven syllables is deliberate. This can be seen by the fact that in unit A and in A' Paul says, " I came preaching/' but here in the center it becomes "we preach/' If he had preserved the first person singular in the center, line G-i would have only six syllables 5 0 ) . Furthermore, in each of the three references to ''preaching/' Paul uses a different word. In A-2 it is , in A'-3 it is , and in G-i it becomes . If Paul had used the first word in the center, G-i would have nine syllables, and if he had used the second, it would have eight. Only with the third alternative does the line balance out with seven. The same process of selection is evident in the second line (G-2). In the poem Paul has mentioned " t h e cross of Christ" (six syllables) and " t h e word of the cross" (seven syllables). The first was probably rejected because it has ) Through retro-translation from Greek to Aramaic, BLACK identifies rhythmic structure and rhyme in a signifcant number of places in the synoptic Gospels. There both of these features occur in the Greek text.
Cf. BLACK, pp. 143
50 49

f.

) By shifting to the plural, Paul also achieves an auditory corre spondence between the two lines which now end with and . Thus it is all the more evident that his shift to the plural is for poetical reasons.

POETIC STRUCTURE OF I COR. I I7-II 2

289

the wrong number of syllables. The second is rejected because it does not rhyme. With the selection of there is the rhyme of with (G-i) but also, the even more remarkable rhyme of with in F'-2. Thus the four fold repetition of seven in the center is best under stood as deliberate. Syllabic meter is not unknown in the Middle East. Ephraem the Syrian, in the fourth century, used this meter extensively and immortalized it in Syriac literature 5 1 ). With St. Ephraem the seven syllable poetic line is seen in full bloom. However, the appearance in writing of a highly developed poetic form usually means that the form existed for a considerable period of time prior to its use in writing by a famous poet. Without such an assumption, it is difficult to imagine who would read the poetry. The pre-Islamic Arabic poetry was developing during this same period and this assumption governs that development. There is little Syriac literature prior to St. Ephraem and pre-Christian Syriac literature was mostly destroyed by zealous Christians. Thus prior to St. Ephraem, the trail of his poetic form fades out. Or does it ? If we can assume that Paul was raised in Jerusalem at the feet of Gamaliel, and if he is the highly skilled poet that this literary masterpiece demonstrates, and if he has close connec tions to Greek-Syriac speaking Antioch, then is it not possible that in the center of this poem we have a prototype of St. Ephraem's famous seven syllable poetic meter ? The device is all the more remarkable in that it is transferred presumably from Aramaic/Syriac poetry and used with the Greek language. It is little wonder that Paul was not able to apply such a precise device widely in an extended poem. It is enough that he
) Syriac fathers in the Middle East read the seven syllabic line with stresses on syllables 1, 3, 5, and 7. When the four lines of units G and F ' are read giving these syllables the stress, the seven syllables of each line combine with the end rhyme to give a striking poetic beauty to the lines. This is aided by the exclusive use of liquids in the final letters of each final word. These are -, -, -, . A consideration of internal rhyme may have helped determine the shift from " (F-2) to (F'-2). With the latter word, there are two inner rhymes in the Une, one with " e " and the other with the final " n . " These are . Both rhymes would have been missing if Paul had repeated the word Greeks in this Une rather than changing to gentiles. The stress pattern of Syriac poetry mentioned above reinforces this inner rhyme. Furthermore syllable count may yet be significant for Hebrew poetry, cf. D. N. FREEDMAN, "Pro legomenon' ' in The Forms of Hebrew Poetry (New York: Ktav Publishing House, c. 1915, 1972), xxxv.
19
51

290

. . BAILEY

manages to use it in the center to reinforce artistically the theologi cal climax of the poem. In summary of this center of seven couplets, the major themes are as follows :
The world and God's wisdom The kerygmaand those who believe Jews and Greeks (who do not believe) The cross Jews and Greeks (who do not believe) Christ, the wisdom of Godand those who are called The world and God's wisdom.

Having completed a cursory examination of the individual units, we must return to an examination of features which unite the entire poem. Outstanding among these is the phenomenon of double inversion. The seven themes are each repeated moving to a climax in the cross which occurs at the outside and at the center. But at the same time, each half of the poem is itself inverted. This double inversion appears as table on page 27 5 2 ). The triple repetition of the cross (I) has been noted (p. 7). We have also observed that the themes of C and D, as well as D' and C (HI), are very tightly inter-related (p. 20). That relation is here reinforced by the double inversion. The themes of the second column can now be observed with ease. The Message is set forth four times. In the first half of the poem it is mentioned prior to the comparison between acceptance and rejection and in the second half after that comparison. Acceptance and rejection are contrasted four times with a particle separating the two in each case. Thus two sets of poetic structures are superimposed upon the same lines with exquisite skill. The double inversion form also sheds light on the redactional question. When the double inversion principle is used in a particular poem, there are naturally two climaxes. The first is the center of the overall poem which is repeated at the outside (in this case, the theme of the cross) and then the second point of emphasis occurs at the center of each of the two halves of the poem (in this case, the theme of rejection). In each of the two other cases where I have found this form, there is a special relationship between these two climaxes 53 ). The case of Ephesians 13-14 is of particular
) A c t s ii 23-36 a n d E p h e s i a n s i 3-14 also use d o u b l e inversion. B A I L E Y , p p . 83-92. 63 ) Ibid.
62

Cf.

POETIC STRUCTURE OF I COR. I I7-II 2

I THE CROSS I I ACCEPTANCE AND REJECTION COMPARED IN THE LIGHT OF THE MESSAGE III REJECTION

29I

I preach the cross of Christ The word of the cross Those being destroyed but () We who are being saved The scribe and the scholar made foolish the world does not know

D E, F G we preach Christ crucified F', E' The folly of the kerygma Those who believe sin () Jews and Greeks who reject

B' A' I proclaim Christ crucified

Jews and gentiles who reject but (S) those who are called Christ, the wisdom and power of God D' Men are weak and foolish the wise and powerful shamed Boasters in God's presence but () You are in Christ Jesus Christ who became wisdom for us from God

interest because there the two climaxes are united by the repeti tion of the word redemption. The primary climax of the overall poem is the redemption of all things. The secondary climax of the two halves is the redemption of mankind. In that poem, the repeti tion of the word redemption links the two climaxes in an unmistak able way. Now here in this Corinthians passage, there is apparently a redactional effort to reinforce the relationships between the two climaxes by the same method, namely that of repeating a key word in each climax. The original writing of the poem had no such word association. But comment d. makes special reference to "brethren" and this comment is in the very center of the secondary climax between unit C and D. Then the same reference to "breth ren" occurs at the end of the poem in Unit A' which is semantically

22

. . BAILEY

a p a r t of t h e primary climax. This can be seen diagrammatically in the second half of the poem as follows : We preach The cross -Acceptance and rejection -The message rejection "consider your call brethren'' rejection -Acceptance and rejection -The message " I came brethren" The cross The question arisesis this latter phrase, " I came brethren/' an appendage t o t h e original poem ? Possibly. The line now reads : , , The double use of the verb " c o m e " is redundant and indicates an imprecision t h a t is unknown in the poem at large54). MEYER prefers t o place t h e two verbs in the first phrase as we have done and observes t h a t others have called this " a n intolerable tautology/' M E Y E R points out t h a t this so called tautology remains regardless of where you p u t the second verb
55

) . Furthermore, the construc

tion of an aorist participle plus an aorist indicative plus a present participle is both rare and peculiar. Finally the corresponding line ) In the original poem there is no redundancy aside from the comments. ) H . A . W . M E Y E R , Critical and Exegetical Hand-book to the Epistles to the Corinthians, translated from the German by D. D. BANNERMAN (New York: Funk and Wagner, 1884), p. 43. Then MEYER argues against any tautology in the passage by appealing to Acts vii 34 which has a double use of the verb come with tenses identical to those found in line A'-i. However, the Acts text cannot be used as evidence because there the two uses of the one verb occur directly after one another and are part of an Old Testament quotation and follow an Old Testament pattern of speech. The Peshitta in Acts vii 34 translates both occurrences of the verb in the same form as the Old Testament Hebrew. However, in line A'-i in the Corinthians passage, the Peshitta translators omit the second occurrence of the verb. They appar ently did not judge it as a Semitic construction but rather saw it as redundant. In modern times, both the N E B and the J confirm the judgment of the Peshitta and omit the second instance of the verb. On the other hand, the RSV and the NAB maintain both.
55 54

POETIC STRUCTURE OF I COR. I I7-II 2

293

in unit -i does not have any direct reference to the listeners a t all. We can conjecture t h a t originally line A'-i merely read, " I came to you." Thus this addition of " I came brethren" can perhaps best be understood as an addition attached to the line to reinforce the relationship between the primary climax of the seven units and the secondary climax of the double inversion. The following line (A'-2) has a second redundant phrase t h a t seems to have been placed in the text for a similar reason. In this case, it is necessary to observe A'-2 with its parallel in the first unit. These compare as follows : A- 3 A'-2 " Not with wise words ' ' " N o t in eloquent words (or wisdom) "

The phrase "or wisdom" may be a part of the original composition and again may be secondary. Anyone attuned to hearing the parallel between units A and A' would not need the extra " o r wisdom" in line A'-2. "Wise words" clearly parallels "eloquent words." The repetition of "wisdom" in the lower line merely reinforces the parallel. Again we can conjecture t h a t someone is trying to help a new reader who may miss the parallel. Thus in unit A' there may be brief additions to the original poem made by someone who fully understands the poetic structure, written for a reader who does not. The first addition, " I came brethren," helps the reader connect the primary and secondary climaxes of the poem. The phrase "or wisdom" helps establish the connection between the opening and closing discussions of the cross. Thus, both additions reinforce the poem at the points of its climaxes. What then can be suggested for authorship of these final changes ? Again, a definitive answer is not possible. However, the most probable answer is Paul himself. Unlike comment e., these changes are made by someone who understands very precisely the structure of the poem and seem to presuppose revision for a new set of readers. The additions are brief enough t h a t the original balance of the poem is not broken by them. Thus the poem exhibits three literary levels. There is the original poem plus two layers of secondary comments t h a t fall into five types. These are: 1. There is some adjustment in the first stanza to allow for a smooth transisition into the poem from the previous discussion. 2. There are comments that explain key words in the poem. 3. There are comments that reinforce the original poetic structure.

294

. . BAILEY

4. One of the Old Testament quotations is expanded beyond its original form. 5. One comment adds some new abstract ideas that are not structurally a part of the poetry and are theologically foreign to it.

It is our conviction that Paul himself is the author of the first three of these five types of comments and that an early redactor is responsible for the last two. This leads us to the conclusion that Paul is most likely re-using an old piece of writing which he originally composed for a more Oriental community that would have understood and appreciated such magnificent poetry. The question of a written document does not necessarily enter the discussion because quite naturally Paul, the poet, would have had such a composition memorized. We can suppose that it originally came out of his long ministry in the region of Antioch and Cilicia and is re-used here in the Corinthian correspondence 5 6 ). A final overall pattern worth observing is the repetition of wisdom and power all through the units of the poem. Together by positive or negative reference they are as follows:
The wisdom of the world The power of God and the cross The power of God The wisdom of the world C The wisdom of the world D The wisdom of God The wisdom of the world E The wisdom of God F The power of the world (signs) The wisdom of the world (wisdom) G The cross F ' (The power of) the crossa stumbling block (The wisdom of) the crossfolly E ' The power of God The wisdom of God D ' The wisdom of God The power of God C The wisdom of the world The power of the world B ' The wisdom of God A' The wisdom of the world The cross ) I Cor. ii 6-10 is also structured around the inversion principle. However in this latter passage the structure is much simpler. Furthermore the vocab ulary incorporates mystery religion and gnostic vocabulary with references to " t h e initiates/' " t h e deep things of God," and " a hidden mystery/' In this second poem on the same subject, Paul seems to be solving his own "hermeneutical problem" and bridging the gap between a more Oriental thought world and the Corinthian mind. He does compose poetry for the Corinthians but it is far simpler in form.

POETIC STRUCTURE OF I COR. I I7-II 2

295

There seems to be no special pattern either in the use of "God" and "the world" or of "wisdom" and "power" but each unit has one of these latter two themes and the majority exhibit both. Paul used both themes in eight units and indirectly both appear in four others 0 7 ). Only unit C and D are strictly limited to one of the two themes. What then can we conclude from all of this? At least the fol lowing : (1) The structure itself makes much clearer Paul's original intent. The impact of his proclamation of Christ as the power and wisdom of God is made much more powerful by the use of this superb artistry of language. (2) The flow of ideas from one topic to another can now be traced with precision as topics are repeated and the reason for the repetition becomes evident. (3) The beginning and end of the literary unit is now marked off and the ancient Greek paragraph division of the Vaticanus that has misled us for so long is now seen as a misunderstanding of the literary form. (4) The poetic form offers new internal evidence for a number of textual problems. (5) Key points of punctuation and translation can be re-examined in the light of new evidence. (6) The redactional elements can be seen with clarity because of the precise nature of the poetic structure. Thus in such sections the redactional question is not based on subjective theological considerations but on the objective nature of a precise poetical form. (7) When the redactional comments are seen as parenthetical, the intent of both the poem and the early comments on it become clear and each is allowed its own integrity. The distortion which results from the forcing of the two into a single line of thought is avoided. (8) Paul surfaces not merely as a man who dashes off quick letters to meet sudden emergencies in the church, but as a skilled poet who uses an enor mously sophisticated poetical form with amazing skill. He does this in the very passage where twice he denies that he came with any eloquence of words. We are obliged to understand his meaning afresh. He perhaps means that he did not come as a Greek rhetori 8 cian but as a Hebrew prophet ).
57 ) This leaves only unit C with the single theme of "wisdom.'' The cross is defined as both the power and wisdom of God, so by implication, both themes are in Unit G and A'. Then in Unit B, salvation is linked to power. Thus it is legitimate to assume t h a t the power of God is implied in the ref erence to salvation in line E-2 and in B'-2. 68 ) One of the signs of the prophet, from Amos to Muhammad in the

296

. E. BAILEY

(9) In the light of the fact that this poem has its first unes rear ranged for inclusion in the letter and that there are poetically informed comments for the non-poetic reader, there is the possi bility that this poem comes out of Paul's writing and preaching in the forties and perhaps reflects things he wrote for listeners in the region of Greek/Syriac speaking Antioch where Oriental poetry of this type would presumably have been appreciated. (10) Finally, such a high degree of sophistication in poetic form is obviously not a root out of the dry ground. The intended original readers must have understood and appreciated the form and we can assume that there are more such poems in other portions of the Pauline letters 5 9 ). Through the poetic form, Paul's message of Christ, the power and wisdom of God, calls the listener/reader afresh to ponder and respond.
Middle Eastern world, is the gift of poetic utterance. By using poetic utter ance to state the very heart of his message, Paul may be indirectly affirming t h a t he stands in the tradition of Amos and Isaiah, and at the same time denying t h a t he is a philosophically oriented itinerant Greek rhetorician. 59 ) My own research has isolated now four other such poems in Romans and I Corinthians alone. But there is a great deal of the material even in these two letters yet to be examined.

^ s
Copyright and Use: As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a violation of copyright law. This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However, for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available, or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s). About ATLAS: The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association (ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American Theological Library Association.