ΠOPNEYEΙΝ As Body Violation: The Unique Nature of Sexual Sin in 1 Corinthians 6.18
Scholars continue to puzzle over the meaning and rhetorical function of 1 Cor 6.12–20. For many, the burning question is historical: what prompted some Corinthian Christians to defend the use of prostitutes?1 Others have suggested that the rhetoric of the argument works only when certain Corinthian...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Cambridge Univ. Press
1996
|
| In: |
New Testament studies
Year: 1996, Volume: 42, Issue: 4, Pages: 540-558 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | Scholars continue to puzzle over the meaning and rhetorical function of 1 Cor 6.12–20. For many, the burning question is historical: what prompted some Corinthian Christians to defend the use of prostitutes?1 Others have suggested that the rhetoric of the argument works only when certain Corinthian ‘slogans’ are identified and decoded. Still others ponder the predominantly individualistic focus of this section, within a letter labouring at almost every turn to shape Christian community. For several, the stumbling stone is Paul's ‘body’ language. In all of this, the precise contribution of v. 18 has been elusive.2 Increasingly popular is the view that 18b – every sin a man commits is outside the body – is a Corinthian ‘slogan’ known and cited by Paul only to be soundly debunked or at least substantially modified.3 The chief advantage of this view is obvious: a notorious Pauline crux becomes a mere Corinthian quirk. Nevertheless, a majority of interpreters (probably rightly) continue to identify all of v. 18 with Paul's own position, although there is little agreement over the nature of Paul's contrast between sexual sin and other sins. Some take Paul to be arguing for a ‘quantitative’ difference: sexual sin belongs toward the end of a continuum; whatever damage sin causes is intensified in the case of sexual sin. Others detect a sharper, ‘qualitative’ difference: sexual sin is different in kind, not just in degree, from other sins. The chart below (see over, pp. 542–3) collects and orders the principal alternatives we have outlined.4 |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1469-8145 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: New Testament studies
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1017/S002868850002141X |