The article "Holy War" in Corinth: The Apocalyptic Background of Paul’s Struggle against Opponents in 2 Cor 10:3–6 explores the apocalyptic nature of Paul's writings, specifically focusing on his struggle against his opponents in Corinth as depicted in 2 Corinthians 10-13. The article evaluates the presence of apocalyptic eschatology and related themes in 2 Corinthians and suggests that Paul employs the motif of "holy war" in describing his adversaries in these chapters, drawing on the rich biblical tradition of "God's wars." This peer review evaluates the article's strengths and weaknesses, its contribution to the field, and its overall recommendation to authors and editors.

Strengths

The article is well-written and demonstrates a deep understanding of the apocalyptic nature of Paul's writings. The author provides a comprehensive overview of the historical development of the apocalyptic trend in Pauline studies, beginning with the works of Weiss and Schweitzer and moving on to the contributions of Käsemann, Beker, Martyn, and the Union School. The author also engages with the contemporary debate on the meaning of "apocalyptic," drawing on the works of Collins and Wright. The article's methodology is sound, employing an extended sense of the term "apocalyptic" to explore the presence of apocalyptic eschatology and related themes in 2 Corinthians. The article's focus on the motif of "holy war" is a significant contribution to the field, as it sheds new light on Paul's struggle against his opponents in Corinth.

Weaknesses

The article could benefit from a more thorough engagement with the relevant literature on Paul's opponents in Corinth. While the author acknowledges the importance of this topic, they do not provide a detailed analysis of the various scholarly theories on the identity and ideology of Paul's opponents. The article also lacks a clear thesis statement or research question, which would help to guide the reader through the author's arguments and conclusions.

Contribution to the field

The article's focus on the motif of "holy war" is a significant contribution to the field of Pauline studies. By drawing on the rich biblical tradition of "God's wars," the author demonstrates how Paul employs this motif to describe his struggle against his opponents in Corinth. The article's engagement with the apocalyptic trend in contemporary Pauline studies is also noteworthy, as it provides a comprehensive overview of the historical development of this trend and its significance for understanding Paul's writings.

Recommendation to authors and editors

Overall, the article is a well-written and insightful contribution to the field of Pauline studies. However, it could benefit from a more detailed analysis of the relevant literature on Paul's opponents in Corinth, as well as a clearer thesis statement or research question. The author could also consider expanding their analysis beyond the motif of "holy war" to explore other apocalyptic themes in 2 Corinthians.

Author Response

I am very grateful for your thoughtful and kind review.

1 Suggestion: The article could benefit from a more thorough engagement with the relevant literature on Paul's opponents in Corinth.

1 Response: I am grateful for this suggestion, although the elusive topic of Paul’s opponents identity is beyond the reach of this paper. However, to refer to the most pertinent observations on Judaizers, I expanded and added references to Barrett, Thrall, Gunther, and Bieringer. See:

added n.36 - On the Jewish credentials of Paul's opponents combined with the Hellenistic criteria of boast and comparison, see Barrett (1971: pp. 249-253). For more on the use of cultural categories in the description of Pauline adversaries, see Bieringer (1994: pp. 212–215).

n.46 – I added: I concur with Bieringer (1994: 220) that the apostle can essentially count on the loyalty and obedience of the Corinthians, and calls them to show him a decisive support in the struggle against the opponents. It also indicated by the rhetoric of 2 Cor 10–13 (the use of periautologia, irony, metaphors, and shifts from “I” to “we”).

added n.49 - According to Gunther (1973: pp. 253–255), Paul’s opponents could have drawn on the Jewish apocalyptic (Qumranic) messianism.

added n.51 - On the similarity between the eschatological advent of Christ (in 2 Thess 2:8–9) and the advent of Paul (2 Cor 13:1–4), see Thrall (1980, p.54).

added n.62 - On the Qumran angelology, akin to Paul’s Jewish opponents, see Gunther (1973: pp. 201–205)

n.63 – added: Barrett (1971: p. 240) refers to Apoc. Mos. 17 and LAE 9, when reading 2 Cor 11:3,14, but he does not draw any conclusions from their apocalyptic language. Thrall (1980: pp. 51 – 55) explains the double reference to the servants of Christ and servants of Satan in 2 Cor 10–13 by the presence of Petrine tradition.

added n.86 - On the messianic character of T. Dan 5:10–13, see Gunther (1973: p. 245–247, 250–252)

Also added lines 616-618: The apocalyptic eschatology does not aim to provide a precise answer regarding the identity of Paul's opponents, but it undoubtedly reinforces their Jewish identification.

2 Suggestion: The article also lacks a clear thesis statement or research question, which would help to guide the reader through the author's arguments and conclusions

2 Response: On the thesis – see Abstract: the first and the last phrase:

The purpose of this article is to explore what kind of light apocalyptic eschatology can shed on our understanding of Paul’s argumentation in 2 Cor 10–13.

Ultimately, the apocalyptic eschatology sharpens Paul’s rhetoric, strengthens his authority in Corinth and enhances the weight of his appeals to the community, upon the acceptance of which the salvation of believers depends.

See also lines 75-86, 98-112.

Reviewer 2 Report

A very impressive piece of work.

I comment only to help in the final refinement of the paper.

1. Make clear why "holy war" in always in italics: it is not in the text of 2 Cor.

2. n. 8 On Paul's opponents as "Judaizers," Johannes Munck's Paul and the Salvation of Mankind is too seminal to miss (esp. ch. 6 on 2 Cor)

3. p. 4 Clarify that the OT Greek references are to the LXX.

4. pp. 5ff. Clarify that you have chosen specific texts for comparison to sharpen your argument, but not to pass over that there are many different apocalyptic view of final war and victory of light over darkness (see e.g., Russell, Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic)

5. Heading for sect. 4 is ambiguous

6. On Qumran we cannot assume its community members are mainstream Essene. The Pole Tyloch, for example, reads them as a 'sectarian strand': see Trompf, "Long History of Dead Sea Scroll Scholarship," JRH 6 2002

7. Admit re IQM and 2 Cor 10 sideiby-side that we are comparing movement with an individual. That brings in the sociological issue as to whether 1QM reflects a millenarian movement; see Talmon "Millenarian Movements," Arch. de Sociol. Eur. 7, 1966, indeed it looks like a moment in the Qumran community's history expressed the first (or at least first well documented) one: Trompf, "When was the First Millenarian Movement? Qumran etc." in The Sum of our Choices (E.J. Sharpe Festschrift) 1996

8 Clarify that Belial is referred to only once in the NT, in 2 Cor. Kümmel (Introd. NT) early argued that it was the term was taken over from Qumran (it should be stressed how often it appears in 1QM!) The exploration of T 12 Patr. is useful but care must be taken over identification with Satan (and the god of this world) and distinction in texts, so this should be clarified. T.J. Lewis covers important literature in The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol. 1.

9 To discuss spiritualized military imagery in Paul without considering also (Paulinist) Ephes. 6 (and its sources) seems strange.

Thanks

GWT

Author Response

I am very grateful for your thoughtful, thorough and kind review.

Make clear why "holy war" in always in italics: it is not in the text of 2 Cor.

I changed the “holy war” to the holy war, as recommended by the reviewer and by SBL HS 2ed.

n. 8 On Paul's opponents as "Judaizers," Johannes Munck's Paul and the Salvation of Mankind is too seminal to miss (esp. ch. 6 on 2 Cor)

Thank you for the suggestion. I had a look at Munck’s monograph, but unfortunately I could not find there anything I could use to refine my arguments. I disagree with Munck on the utter rebelliousness of the Corinthian community, to which the outsiders are only a backdrop. The only place I found somehow touching upon my argument was the mention of Paul’s threatening words in 2 Cor 10:2 and 13:3-4, pronounced during his “apocalyptic missionary journey through the Gentile world” (p. 191). However, it was a reference to a highly dubious “severe letter”, comprised, according to the author, in 2 Cor 10–13. I admire the author’s passion, but I don’t share his convictions which seem to go against the rhetorical stasis of 2 Cor 10–13.

p. 4 Clarify that the OT Greek references are to the LXX.

Done

pp. 5ff. Clarify that you have chosen specific texts for comparison to sharpen your argument, but not to pass over that there are many different apocalyptic view of final war and victory of light over darkness (see e.g., Russell, Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic)

Done. Added in n.25: 1QM was chosen to sharpen the paper’s argument. See also other Jewish texts of the Second Temple period where the motif appears: 1 Q28a 1:19–29; 3:7; 1QH^a 10:27–32; 14:27–38; 17:22; 4Q161 frags. 8–10:18–21; 4Q246 2:8–9; 4Q402 frag. 4:7; 4Q471a frag. 1:1–8; 1 En. 55:3–57:3; 62; 90:19; 91:12; 99:4–7; Jub. 23:22; Pss. Sol. 8:1–3, 15; 17:21–25; 4 Ezra 6:22–28; 13:1–13; 16:40–50; 2 Bar. 70:1–10; 72:6; Sib. Or. 3:295–345, 668–709, 795–808; 5:360–385, 511–531; 8:72–109.

Heading for sect. 4 is ambiguous

I might have unconsciously followed Abraham Malherbe’s “Antisthenes and Odysseus, and Paul at War”. I’d rather leave it, not to be too specific, as the content also clarifies the title.

On Qumran we cannot assume its community members are mainstream Essene. The Pole Tyloch, for example, reads them as a 'sectarian strand': see Trompf, "Long History of Dead Sea Scroll Scholarship," JRH 6 2002.

Thank you for this pertinent remark, with which I wholeheartedly agree. In note 27 (at the first appearance of the Yahad) I added:

Following Bowley (2015: p. 260) and Werret and Parker (2015: p. 298), for my argument here, the various designations for the group (Yahad, Essenes) is not of crucial importance. Although the War Scroll’s relationship with the Essenes is difficult to determine, it contains a number of characteristics that are understood by most Dead Sea scholars as being emblematic of Qumran sectarianism.

Admit re IQM and 2 Cor 10 sideiby-side that we are comparing movement with an individual. That brings in the sociological issue as to whether 1QM reflects a millenarian movement; see Talmon "Millenarian Movements," Arch. de Sociol. Eur. 7, 1966, indeed it looks like a moment in the Qumran community's history expressed the first (or at least first well documented) one: Trompf, "When was the First Millenarian Movement? Qumran etc." in The Sum of our Choices (E.J. Sharpe Festschrift) 1996

Again, thank you for this thoughtful remark. Paul, though being an individual, also represents an important strand of Jewish-Christian apocalyptic movement. I am not sure the millenarian movement, which is a fairly recent phenomenon and modern descriptive category, can be used to properly describe Pauline communities. It would call for a cross-cultural approach and specific socio-religious categories, the type of research that it is beyond the scope of this paper.

Again, thank you for the remark. Of course Belial appears in NT only once, in 2 Cor 6:15. There are many more references to Satan in Paul (Rom 16:20; 1 Cor 5:5; 7:5; 2 Cor 2:11; 11:14; 12:7; 1 Thess 2:18; 2 Thess 2:9). The interchange between Beliar and Satan, which one finds in 2 Cor, also appears in T. 12 Patr. In T. Dan 3:6, 5:6 and 10-11 these two names refer to one character. Kee (Testaments, 779) also goes in this direction. That does not and cannot suggest that Paul, using the name Beliar, is drawing either on T. 12. Patr or on Qumran. It simply proves his rooting in a common apocalyptic tradition.

9 To discuss spiritualized military imagery in Paul without considering also (Paulinist) Ephes. 6 (and its sources) seems strange.

I am focusing on 2 Cor 10:3-6. Besides Eph 6, there are e.g. peristaseis catalogs in Paul, where the spiritual warfare metaphors emerge. The analysis of all is beyond the scope of this paper.

Reviewer 3 Report

line 24, 37: Apocalyptic needs a noun--the term on its own doesn't quite work.

lines 46-64: The notion of the apocalyptic imagination needs to be foregrounded in the paragraph, signaling an important idea that precedes Wright's critique of the current obscurity.

95-97: Helpful restatement of your thesis in the larger academic conversation.

133-134: The "Paul may have drawn on" moves back from the resource of the apocalyptic imagination to a more literal level of tropes. Although this kind of exegetical work benefits from the literal parallels you're bringing to the surface, fusing it with the ongoing imaginal work would not reduce the force of your argument to simple linguistic forms.

154-196: This is helpful and well-framed background material for readers not versed in early Biblical literatures.

215-257: The parallels that you draw are compelling and viable, building on the ingredients identified in the imaginal frame. It's nicely balanced against a literalistic read given alternative sources that also constitute potential influencing forms for the War Scroll. Make sure pulled quote (251-257) is properly indented.

259-277: This is really clear and compelling analysis, especially in pointing out how the metaphors borrow from but extend past actual military action.

277-294: This does a nice job of providing textually robust examples of the anti-authoritarian, non-violent context of the military metaphors used--why they were not intended as literal.

297: You use apocalyptic so often as an adjective that its unqualified presentation here is a bit jarring. "Apocalyptic thinking" would be better, I think, throughout...or even "the Apocalyptic."

310: Delete comma

318-348: I like this framing of Paul in parallel with 1QM: it seems compelling and textually grounded in ways that allow the distinctions that you draw in the paragraph that follows to become even more pronounced.

350-401: This kind of linguistic exegesis isn't my strong suit, but you do seem to have a deep understanding of the inner structures of the Greek and effects it would have on its readers.

402-409: The shared Imaginary, in addition to lexical and oral practices, is also something you've presented but not developed that would help, here.

481-513: I appreciate how you've laid out the notion of enmity and matrimony as important features of the kind of belonging Paul gestured toward, contextualized by the other early literature.

530-541: This is where the payoff is--you do a really nice job contrasting Paul with the other literatures, showing why the differences are important, and keeping it away from a merely literal or superficial parallelistic influence.

The conclusion does an excellent job, not only of really honing into the main points you've proven above, but also in terms of expanding the exegetical emphasis back into the context of the social imaginary that you started with. Well done.

Author Response

I am very grateful for your thoughtful, thorough and kind review.

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

line 24, 37: Apocalyptic needs a noun--the term on its own doesn't quite work.

I actually use “apocalyptic” as a noun and I am wondering whether it is clear enough or not. I see that the more recent scholarship abandons such use (Collins, Apocalyptic Imagination, 2; see also Davies, Paul among the Apocalypses, 25-28). I am adding some descriptive categories, then.

Line 24: Apocalyptic perspective

Line 37: the apocalyptic thought

Line 299: apocalyptic literature

Line 603: The apocalyptic thought

lines 46-64: The notion of the apocalyptic imagination needs to be foregrounded in the paragraph, signaling an important idea that precedes Wright's critique of the current obscurity.

At the phrase “Currently, the term apocalyptic functions on many levels, denoting a literary genre, a cultural and historical background or a social movement, in particular, Jewish apocalypticism with its dominant ideas (Wright 2015, pp. 137–138).”,

I added note 5: Wright himself uses the adjectival “apocalyptic” in connection with “worldview”, which is the world we look through, the unseen and pre-cognitive framework through which any given community approaches the world (see Wright [2013: p. 28]). Others associate the term with “social imaginary”, which presents the advantage of appreciating the affective, imaginative, and supra-rational way that we negotiate being-in-the-world (see Smith [2009: p. 63]). Still others speak of the apocalyptic “mode”, special way of thinking found in the apocalypses (see Tigchelaar [1996: pp. 5–8]). On the various understandings of the adjectival “apocalyptic”, see Davies (2016: pp. 30–35).

95-97: Helpful restatement of your thesis in the larger academic conversation.

Thank you so much for this remark.

133-134: The "Paul may have drawn on" moves back from the resource of the apocalyptic imagination to a more literal level of tropes. Although this kind of exegetical work benefits from the literal parallels you're bringing to the surface, fusing it with the ongoing imaginal work would not reduce the force of your argument to simple linguistic forms.

I agree and that is what I would like to imply. The biblical texts and the Jewish literature of the Second Temple period are, however, the main points of reference and fuel for the apocalyptic imagination. I don’t think I have space here to analyze more than biblical texts, e.g. visual culture, coins, monuments, etc.

154-196: This is helpful and well-framed background material for readers not versed in early Biblical literatures.

Thank you so much for this remark.

Thank you very much, again.

259-277: This is really clear and compelling analysis, especially in pointing out how the metaphors borrow from but extend past actual military action.

Thank you so much.

277-294: This does a nice job of providing textually robust examples of the anti-authoritarian, non-violent context of the military metaphors used--why they were not intended as literal.

Thank you so much.

297: You use apocalyptic so often as an adjective that its unqualified presentation here is a bit jarring. "Apocalyptic thinking" would be better, I think, throughout...or even "the Apocalyptic."

As above, I added some descriptive categories.

310: Delete comma

Done

Thank you so much for this remark.

350-401: This kind of linguistic exegesis isn't my strong suit, but you do seem to have a deep understanding of the inner structures of the Greek and effects it would have on its readers.

Thank you so much for this remark.

402-409: The shared Imaginary, in addition to lexical and oral practices, is also something you've presented but not developed that would help, here.

Unfortunately, I do not have the space to develop this issue, I guess it remains for some future publications. I only add lines 413-415:

With the help of metaphors, the apostle evokes in the imagination of his recipients popular images of the holy war, stories and legends related to it, thus motivating the Corinthians to stand in the ranks of God’s warriors.

481-513: I appreciate how you've laid out the notion of enmity and matrimony as important features of the kind of belonging Paul gestured toward, contextualized by the other early literature.

Thank you so much for this remark.

I am very grateful for both educational and encouraging tone in which this review was written.

Article Menu

Holy War in Corinth: The Apocalyptic Background of Paul’s Struggle against Opponents in 2 Cor 10:3–6

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI