Does 5b mean that Paul only partially
concedes to the thesis of the strong? Conzelmann sees Paul’s criticism of the
strong’s position starting in verse 5, where he indirectly objects to the Corinthians’
oversimplified argument, which denies any role of other gods and sacrificial meat
in the way their lives should be led. Paul thinks that this “pseudo-objectivising”
fails to address the actual problem. Faith does not consist of a denial of
other gods, but in professing the true God. Conzelmann further thinks that Paul’s
statement in 5b should be taken seriously and that he himself is not as “liberal”
as the Corinthians. In Paul’s view, other powerful beings do exist, though he
does not consider them to be gods. Conzelmann’s interpretation is in line with
a general Jewish conception of demons, which counts in its favour, as well as
the fact that it may be reconciled with 1 Cor 10, 1-22.
The ambiguous verse 5 shows that Paul
does not fully identify with the radical monotheism of the Corinthian strong. He
does, however, accept the monotheistic creed and its consequences as a
legitimate point of departure for the argument on freedom. The other gods are “so
called” (5a) not with regard to their existence and their power, but with
regard to their claim to divinity. In 5b Paul is therefore referring to the
reality of pagan idolatry and probably also to that of the demon world
associated with it, which could bear upon the Corinthian believers. Paul is
only partly endorsing the point of view of the strong in order to make
provision for the influence of other religions in Corinth. (Philip Bosman, Conscience
in Philo and Paul: A Conceptual History of the Synodia Group [Wissenschaftliche
Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe 166; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003],
207)
To Support this Blog:
Email for Amazon Gift
card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com
Email for Logos.com Gift
Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com
