Ernst Käsemann insists that 1 Corinthians 14 shall be the cipher for decrypting the doctrine of inspiration and pneumatic enthusiasm in this book "Jesus Means Freedom". (Thread to follow!)
Käsemann argues that "enthusiasts" are necessary to the church, because--despite being on the fringe of heresy--they prevent the Christianity from becoming anemic and lifeless.
And ironically, the fringes of Christianity--both heretical and trending towards heresy--preserve the Church by giving it life and preventing the bulk of rational Christianity from becoming lifeless.
Käsemann concludes that the heretical expressions of the church or those on the fringe of orthodoxy are the ones that preserve and save the bulk of Christianity.
Käsemann says it is for this reason in the Corinthian Correspondence that Paul does not excommunicate Christians who deny the resurrection.
At this point, some may object that Paul did excommunicate Christians who denied the resurrection such as Hymenaeus and Philetus in 2 Timothy 2.
Yet the counter point is that the "Pastoral Epistles" such as 2 Timothy were not Pauline (yet stemmed from communities founded by Paul and contains some elements of Pauline teachings). This is demonstrated by the contrast between 1 Corinthians 14 and pseudo-Pauline literature.
For instance, Käsemann notices how Paul speaks favorably of the enthusiasts in 1 Cor 14, and does not object them from the community, but instead includes them, even though they are partially censored.
Käsemann notes that Paul allows the enthusiasts to share their individualistic "hymn, a lesson, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation" that does not edify the church, but does bless the individual.
Against the fundamentalists, who deny the difference of inspiration, not the stark difference between tolerance in 1 Corinthians 14 to the ex-communication in 2 Timothy 2. Surely 2 Timothy is written by a church run by inexperienced leaders.
Another example of contrast is the prohibition of women teachers in 1 Timothy 2 (from the same group of writings as 2 Timothy 2), that has been injected into 1 Corinthians 14:33-36 by later scribes (who likely copied it from the ironically named "Pastoral Epistles")
Considering that women were the first eye-witnesses to the resurrection of Jesus, this further demonstrates that 1&2 Timothy and Titus are at a distance, and a secondary witness to the apostolic witness.
And inspiration likewise is another example of distance, because the strongest claims for direct divine inspiration originate precisely from those New Testament writings most removed from revelation of Jesus Christ in the flesh: 2 Timothy 3:16 & 1 Peter 1:20. Isn't this obvious?
The most dubious New Testament writings made the strongest claims to direct divine inspiration! Yet the Pauline discussions of inspiration and revelation such as 1 Cor. 14:32-33 the spirits of prophets are subject to the prophets, for God is a God not of disorder but of peace.
Is it surprising that the "Pastoral Epistles" silence women, and we find interpolations into 1 Corinthians 14 of later manuscripts that repeat similar verbiage? Is this not collusion? Are we really surprised?
And these secondary witnesses that are removed from the apostolic witnesses are alive today, they are the ones declaring the inerrant word of god and telling women to remain silent, just like those "pastoral epistles" that added this accretion that contradicted 1 Cor. 14.
The Pauline response in 1 Cor 14 isn't to excommunicate them, and I understand the temptation, because the Pauline circle that "pretended" to be Paul and wrote in Paul's name, were to bold as declare that their words were not only Paul's but were the very human words of God!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
