Tuesday, May 19, 2009
The Heart of Christianity and the Heart of Paul's Theology
Borg is committed to making Christianity viable and authentic for modern people by making distinction between the "old" paradigm and the "emerging" paradigm of Christianity. Borg is passionate about authentic Christian message rooted in Jesus and Paul, which is basically about living the transformative life. This book is a must read for all who ask what is Christianity about. This book not only deconstructs the old paradigm but reconstructs a more healthy way of living Christian life today without losing faith, hope and love of God. "Salvation is about the transformation of life, individually together, here and now. And the Bible speaks of these two transformations as an experience now, and as a hope for history, and as a hope that leads beyond history" (p.183). As seen here, his reading is balanced between various aspects of time and life. In my own book, Christ's Body in Corinth, I continue the spirit of this kind of authentic faith and Christian experience which I find in Paul's letters, especially in 1 Corinthians. As for Paul, the center of the heart of his theology is "embodiment" of Christ. It is "Christic body" as I articulated in my book. If we read Rom 8:1-11 for example, what is essential for Paul is to live the faithful life of Christ, not a mere belief in Jesus but a life of faithful action modeled after Christ's cross. The central message here (Rom 8) is not something like "Jesus died instead of me or for sin; so I don't die." The opposite is true. Jesus died and I should die too. In other words, again in Rom 8:1-11, those who walk according to the Spirit are the ones who submit their will to God's law, which aims at "life and peace." I believe that Borg's sketch of authentic Christian faith aiming at transformation of our life is very important to our re-envisioning of a new community for all.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
wild flowers and cultivated flowers
Did I do wrong when I planted wild flowers in a little garden at our home? Walking on neighborhood streets, I found a bunch of beautiful wildflowers, all different by shape and color. I transferred some of them to our garden. First of all, I am not sure whether these flowers will survive in our garden, away from their original place. Second, I am not sure whether these flowers get along with other cultivated flowers. However, there is no question that these wild flowers are also flowers – beautiful and unique. I will keep vigilant eyes on this garden to see what happens next.
Actually, the above episode or reflection of mine has much to do with my theology or worldview. When I wrote Christ's Body in Corinth, one of the largest concerns was the issue of diversity. How do we live in this wild and cultivated world? How do we treat others? How do we examine ourselves in the presence of others? What is an ideal state that we seek to achieve when we live in one world?
Actually, the above episode or reflection of mine has much to do with my theology or worldview. When I wrote Christ's Body in Corinth, one of the largest concerns was the issue of diversity. How do we live in this wild and cultivated world? How do we treat others? How do we examine ourselves in the presence of others? What is an ideal state that we seek to achieve when we live in one world?
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Obsessive identity vs. ethics of living
On April 16, 2009, I delivered my first public speech (lecture) titled "Christianity in Korea: Its History and Challenge" at Virginia Union University, Richmond, VA. This speech is part of lecture series called "Forum on Religion and the Contemporary World." I briefly sketched the history and development of Christianity in Korea starting from the late 19th century (see Cambridge Dictionary of Christianity for this topic, which will be published in late 2009; I contributed this item). A majority of South Korean population (about 40%) are Christians. A majority of them are fundamental Christians, who exclude other religions as having no truth or salvation. Major features of Korean Christianity have to do with dualism, individualism, Shamanism, political conservatism and exclusivism. Problems can be approached from many different perspectives. Yet I think the most problematic is that Christians in Korea are obsessed with their belonging or identity: "I am saved; are you saved?" It is a sort of indicative-imperative logic: "my belonging to God is secure, once and for all. I do as a result of the current strong identity in God." But Paul says, "endure your salvation until the end." This kind of individualistic orientation of religion costs ethics. I believe that identity and ethics are not two different things but the same in quality. As I argue in my book, Christ's Body in Corinth, as for Paul, someone's identity cannot be separated from ethics of living. The centerpiece of ethical living is to live Christ crucified. Otherwise, the sense of obsessive belonging may sacrifice ethics of living.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Unity and diversity
I paste here the following piece that comes from the blog Exploring Ecumenism in which my book is mentioned.
The Paradox of Unity and Diversity
Kim's exegesis of 1 Corinthians is detailed and complex and it is not my intention to reproduce it in detail here. Details of the book can be found in the left hand sidebar. My intention is to attempt a hermeneutic based upon the particular context of ecumenism in 21st century Britain and more specifically England.
However, to do this I must attempt a brief summary of the main argument in Kim's text. The primary metaphor Kim refers to is the Body of Christ. The question is how does this metaphor inform our understanding of unity and diversity? Particularly, given the common ways in which Kim argues this metaphor is misunderstood.
Kim's conclusion leads to a paradox. Unity leads to divisiveness whilst diversity leads to unity. Kim puts it like this on page 4:
Paul's argument presupposes that the divisiveness of the Corinthian community results not from a lack of unity but from a failure on the part of its members to acknowledge and respect the diversity present in the community. (...) But unity is not the goal or purpose of Paul's letter because in Greco-Roman society, unity can be a destructive and oppressive language.
The last sentence refers I think to the Pax Romana, where peace was enforced throughout the Roman Empire by the sword. Each conquered nation was allowed to live in peace in return for certain demands form Rome, most notably worship of the Emperor. Nevertheless there was a degree of diversity across the Roman Empire (all large empires and organisations have to manage diversity in some way) and so for example, Paul felt unable to accept contributions from the Corinthian church because of their patronage system whereas he had no such hesitations with the Philippians just up the road but in a different province.
The Corinthians were dividing into factions and each faction drew boundaries around itself, within which there was an expectation of unity. Within these boundaries there was hierarchy, the more powerful, presumably those with power of patronage, set the terms of their faction. This was not a community that was able to accept there might be a diversity of truths (Kim, page 5). This resonates with the writings of Rabbi Jonathan Sacks who writes about a dual morality, where 'biblical morality ... adds to ... universals a context bound morality dependent on history and memory'. To a degree I think Kim's book is by accident a Christian commentary on Sacks' work The Dignity of Difference. To follow this up further it is worth reading the posts around the above link which comment on chapter 3 of that book.
The focus of Kim's reading of 1 Corinthians is the implications of reading unity into the Body of Christ, for the marginalised and I'll return to this in future posts. But for ecumenism in England a major problem is the growing rift between centralised formal talks and localised ecumenism. Theology is done differently nationally and locally; to the extent that church leaders and academics do not see what local churches are doing as theology. The discourses are different not only in content but also in form. So, formal talks are based upon written agreements fully cross-referenced and with footnotes. Clearly this is good academic practice but this format tends to make them unavailable to local churches unless mediated through preachers. Locally theology is done through people, property and finance. Walk into any church and look at it, theology is in the walls. Also in its practices and the way it uses its money. Local ecumenism is conducted through these media.
The theological approach to boundaries through formal talks tends to maintain islands of unity. The problem for the churches is that these islands of unity are breaking up.
Read another item on the same blog Exploring Ecumenism ("unity as a rhetoric of control?)"
The Paradox of Unity and Diversity
Kim's exegesis of 1 Corinthians is detailed and complex and it is not my intention to reproduce it in detail here. Details of the book can be found in the left hand sidebar. My intention is to attempt a hermeneutic based upon the particular context of ecumenism in 21st century Britain and more specifically England.
However, to do this I must attempt a brief summary of the main argument in Kim's text. The primary metaphor Kim refers to is the Body of Christ. The question is how does this metaphor inform our understanding of unity and diversity? Particularly, given the common ways in which Kim argues this metaphor is misunderstood.
Kim's conclusion leads to a paradox. Unity leads to divisiveness whilst diversity leads to unity. Kim puts it like this on page 4:
Paul's argument presupposes that the divisiveness of the Corinthian community results not from a lack of unity but from a failure on the part of its members to acknowledge and respect the diversity present in the community. (...) But unity is not the goal or purpose of Paul's letter because in Greco-Roman society, unity can be a destructive and oppressive language.
The last sentence refers I think to the Pax Romana, where peace was enforced throughout the Roman Empire by the sword. Each conquered nation was allowed to live in peace in return for certain demands form Rome, most notably worship of the Emperor. Nevertheless there was a degree of diversity across the Roman Empire (all large empires and organisations have to manage diversity in some way) and so for example, Paul felt unable to accept contributions from the Corinthian church because of their patronage system whereas he had no such hesitations with the Philippians just up the road but in a different province.
The Corinthians were dividing into factions and each faction drew boundaries around itself, within which there was an expectation of unity. Within these boundaries there was hierarchy, the more powerful, presumably those with power of patronage, set the terms of their faction. This was not a community that was able to accept there might be a diversity of truths (Kim, page 5). This resonates with the writings of Rabbi Jonathan Sacks who writes about a dual morality, where 'biblical morality ... adds to ... universals a context bound morality dependent on history and memory'. To a degree I think Kim's book is by accident a Christian commentary on Sacks' work The Dignity of Difference. To follow this up further it is worth reading the posts around the above link which comment on chapter 3 of that book.
The focus of Kim's reading of 1 Corinthians is the implications of reading unity into the Body of Christ, for the marginalised and I'll return to this in future posts. But for ecumenism in England a major problem is the growing rift between centralised formal talks and localised ecumenism. Theology is done differently nationally and locally; to the extent that church leaders and academics do not see what local churches are doing as theology. The discourses are different not only in content but also in form. So, formal talks are based upon written agreements fully cross-referenced and with footnotes. Clearly this is good academic practice but this format tends to make them unavailable to local churches unless mediated through preachers. Locally theology is done through people, property and finance. Walk into any church and look at it, theology is in the walls. Also in its practices and the way it uses its money. Local ecumenism is conducted through these media.
The theological approach to boundaries through formal talks tends to maintain islands of unity. The problem for the churches is that these islands of unity are breaking up.
Read another item on the same blog Exploring Ecumenism ("unity as a rhetoric of control?)"
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Doctor of Ministry practicum: Church and Body of Christ
DMin Practicum on church and body of Christ
* Purpose: to discuss and articulate the relation between church (ekklesia) and the body of Christ (soma christou) from Paul's letters and his theology. In so doing, we will be better equipped to serve the church and society with a sense of balance.
* Textbook: Yung Suk Kim, Christ's Body in Corinth: The Politics of a Metaphor, Fortress Press, 2008.
* Major reflection questions:
1. Does Paul equate church with the body of Christ in his letters?
2. If not, why do you think Paul does not do so? (compare 1 Cor with Eph. or Col.)
3. Trace the use of body of Christ in his letters. Do you find any consistent pattern in all of such usage?
4. What is Paul's view of the church in his letters? (trace the use of church in his letters.)
5. If there is any relationship between church and body of Christ in his letters, what kind would be?
6. "Body of Christ" is composed of the genitive construction (in Greek). Which genitive use will you choose? (for instance, 1) the objective genitive (a body, as social body, belonging to Christ; this is the case of metaphorical organism); 2) the subjective genitive (Christ's own body -- physical body); 3) the attributive genitive (Christ-like body, in the sense of a metaphor for living).
7. How does Paul talk about Christ crucified as a central message of his letters, especially in 1 Cor and Gal?
For helpful information, please visit my web site.
* Purpose: to discuss and articulate the relation between church (ekklesia) and the body of Christ (soma christou) from Paul's letters and his theology. In so doing, we will be better equipped to serve the church and society with a sense of balance.
* Textbook: Yung Suk Kim, Christ's Body in Corinth: The Politics of a Metaphor, Fortress Press, 2008.
* Major reflection questions:
1. Does Paul equate church with the body of Christ in his letters?
2. If not, why do you think Paul does not do so? (compare 1 Cor with Eph. or Col.)
3. Trace the use of body of Christ in his letters. Do you find any consistent pattern in all of such usage?
4. What is Paul's view of the church in his letters? (trace the use of church in his letters.)
5. If there is any relationship between church and body of Christ in his letters, what kind would be?
6. "Body of Christ" is composed of the genitive construction (in Greek). Which genitive use will you choose? (for instance, 1) the objective genitive (a body, as social body, belonging to Christ; this is the case of metaphorical organism); 2) the subjective genitive (Christ's own body -- physical body); 3) the attributive genitive (Christ-like body, in the sense of a metaphor for living).
7. How does Paul talk about Christ crucified as a central message of his letters, especially in 1 Cor and Gal?
For helpful information, please visit my web site.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
deconstructing a social world through metaphor
I am very excited that my book like new baby was born in July 1, 2008 by Fortress Press. I am thrilled as a parent on the one hand, and fearful on the other hand, because I have to watch this baby breathing briskly and busily in this "uncertain" world. Feel free to engage this book. The crucial issue for me in Pauline studies is how to reclaim Paul's radical, contextual theology of "soma christou" primarily re-imagined through Christ's own body -- his crucified body which can be identified with numerous broken bodies in the world. ---Thank you. author, Yung Suk Kim.
DECONSTRUCTING A SOCIAL WORLD THROUGH METAPHOR
"I highly recommend this work to all who take seriously Paul's metaphor of 'the body of Christ.' Kim interprets the metaphor as an alternative vision of vital reconciling community, over against conceptions that emphasize boundary markers to establish social groups. What is at stake in the interpretation of 1 Corinthians, he argues, is not just the ways first-century Christians constructed and lived out social unity but the consequences of our choices for the way we live out our own responsibilities today." -David Odell-Scott, Professor of Philosophy, Kent State University
"Reading as a citizen of an increasingly diverse postcolonial world, Yung Suk Kim protests the scholarly consensus that reads Paul's language of the "body of Christ" in 1 Corinthians as a metaphor for social unity, current in Hellenistic and Roman philosophical and political discourse, in which the integrity of the social body required the vigilant maintenance of group boundaries and the harmony of its members. Kim points out the potential of this reading to promote coercive patterns of enforced unity in the contemporary world.
Kim argues instead that in speaking of the church as Christ's body, Paul relies upon the metaphoric language of embodied vitality and growth, seeking instead to nourish the life-giving practices of a diverse community and to oppose the ideology of a powerful in-group that threatens to "disembody" the Christic body in Corinth. Reading the language of soma christou exclusively from a sociological lens fails to comprehend the important christological coordinates of Paul's thought, which nevertheless have clear and urgent social and political implications. Paul's exhortation is a message of particular importance, Kim suggests, for us who seek to discern the true value of difference in the contemporary world."
DECONSTRUCTING A SOCIAL WORLD THROUGH METAPHOR
"I highly recommend this work to all who take seriously Paul's metaphor of 'the body of Christ.' Kim interprets the metaphor as an alternative vision of vital reconciling community, over against conceptions that emphasize boundary markers to establish social groups. What is at stake in the interpretation of 1 Corinthians, he argues, is not just the ways first-century Christians constructed and lived out social unity but the consequences of our choices for the way we live out our own responsibilities today." -David Odell-Scott, Professor of Philosophy, Kent State University
"Reading as a citizen of an increasingly diverse postcolonial world, Yung Suk Kim protests the scholarly consensus that reads Paul's language of the "body of Christ" in 1 Corinthians as a metaphor for social unity, current in Hellenistic and Roman philosophical and political discourse, in which the integrity of the social body required the vigilant maintenance of group boundaries and the harmony of its members. Kim points out the potential of this reading to promote coercive patterns of enforced unity in the contemporary world.
Kim argues instead that in speaking of the church as Christ's body, Paul relies upon the metaphoric language of embodied vitality and growth, seeking instead to nourish the life-giving practices of a diverse community and to oppose the ideology of a powerful in-group that threatens to "disembody" the Christic body in Corinth. Reading the language of soma christou exclusively from a sociological lens fails to comprehend the important christological coordinates of Paul's thought, which nevertheless have clear and urgent social and political implications. Paul's exhortation is a message of particular importance, Kim suggests, for us who seek to discern the true value of difference in the contemporary world."
Study guides to the book Christ's Body in Corinth
I created study guide for my book, which will be very helpful for group discussion. Chapter by chapter I made a set of questions so central to my book chapters. If interested, you may visit http://www.youaregood.com/bookstudyguide.htm. I will update this study guide if need arises. I will also appreciate if you suggest any ideas to improve it. Thanks.
[There are other languag versions also available: French, German, Spanish and Portuguese]
*Any way, I paste study guide here too:This studying and teaching guide was prepared by the author. The following discussion and reflection questions can be used in a class room or in a small group discussion or in any setting that allows the genuine spirit of studying and engaging, personal or public. Feel free to send email to the author if you have any questions: Yung Suk Kim at youaregood@yahoo.com. Thanks for visiting this page and for the use of my book for study and ministry. For more information, visit the book info page.
Introduction: The Price of Unity
The goal of this chapter is to let readers to understand the author’s approach and thesis of this whole book.
1. Why is it important to read the metaphor soma christou (body of Christ) differently than a metaphorical organism in particular? What are some concerns that are raised by the author?
2. How is a different reading of this metaphor possible or legitimate?
3. In today’s personal or public experiences in this world, does the use of this metaphor (body of Christ) raise any concerns?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 1: Community as “Body”
The goal of this chapter is to analyze a variety of conceptions of community. Different scholarly traditions or approaches (theological and historical approaches, sociological or social-scientific approaches, and the approach of the history-of-religions school) have different ideas about the community. The question is, which one is better, or do we need an alternative?
1. What are some criteria for division of various scholarly approaches to the community? Compare and contrast them (use terms such as boundaries, identity and structure or power relationships).
2. Can you name examples of each approach in today’s life experience (church, school, society and the world) to the conception of community?
3. What are some hidden ideologies at work in the level of interpreters?
4. Is it possible to have an alternative vision of community than the mentioned other approaches?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 2: Community as the “Body of Christ”
The goal of this chapter is to understand a variety of understandings about the metaphor “the body of Christ” in biblical studies. The question is, which one is better than the other, or do we need an alternative?
1. What are major differences between different approaches to the body of Christ (the approach of “organic unity,” the approach of “corporate solidarity” and “the christological approaches”)? Compare and contrast them.
2. What pros and cons can you find in each approach?
3. Can you name some examples of each approach in today’s life experience?
4. What is an alternative approach or understanding about the body of Christ? How can you
evaluate it?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 3: Community “in Christ”
The goal of this chapter is to deconstruct the view of “in Christ” as a boundary marker in 1 Corinthians. The language of “in Christ” in a Corinthian conflicting context can be understood as a cynical rhetoric of Paul’s protest to the hegemonic voice of an “in Christ” group in Corinth.
1. What are various functions of the preposition “in” (dative case) used in Paul’s letters?
2. How does “in Christ” have to do with Paul’s rhetoric that he uses to address Corinthian problems?
3. Can you find the Greco-Roman parallels to which Paul’s cynical language of “in Christ” might refer (1 Cor 4:10)?
4. Is the modal relation of “dying with Christ” consistent in Paul’s theology or in his letters in general?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 4: The Body Politic and the Body of Christ
The goal of this chapter has two parts. One is to take a look at the Greco-Roman and Jewish world in terms of body politic and to relate to Paul’s body politic through the metaphor “the body of Christ.” The other part is to illustrate cases of disembodiment of Christic body found in 1 Corinthians. The conclusion is that Paul takes side of the democratic-inclusive body, and that the Corinthian problems are criticized and deconstructed by this body politic with an emphasis on the deconstructive power of the cross (Christ crucified).
1. What are some major differences between the hegemonic body politic and the
democratic-inclusive body politic? Point out ideologies (philosophy) that support each body politic.
2. Which side of the body politic do you think Paul takes? Why?
3. What do you think is the central cause of the Corinthian problems mentioned in the letter? (divisions, sexual immorality, eating meat sacrifice to idols, etc).
4. Paul does not claim his rights as an apostle (benefits such as financial support). Does this rejection of financial support reflect his protest to the social system of patron-client in the Greco-Roman world?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 5: The Life of the “Body of Christ” in First Corinthians
The goal of this chapter is to examine the metaphor of “the body of Christ” in the whole letter with a focus on the discursive figurative structure of the body. One of the central key words is “Christic body” (rendered as an attributive genitive, Christlike body, as we see similarly in Rom 6:6: the body of sin as “sinful body”). There are three movements of body metaphor in this whole letter: body as cross, body as community and body as resurrection.
1. Does this outline of the discursive figurative structure in 1 Corinthians show distinctive issues and message in Corinthian situation?
2. Compare and contrast various genitive cases applied to the body of Christ? Namely, between 1) the objective genitive (a body belonging to Christ as an organism metaphor), 2) the subjective genitive (Christ’s own body as physical), 3) the attributive genitive (Christlike or Christic body).
3. Do inverted parallelisms in the analysis of the whole letter work in supporting the argument of the chapter and thesis of the whole book?
4. How can you account for the possible transformative relationship, if any, between the metaphor of the body of Christ, Paul and the Corinthian community?
5. What do you think about the difference between Paul's use of the metaphor of "the body of Christ" in 1 Corinthians and the later use by the authors of the so called Deutero-Pauline letters such as Ephesians and Colossians?
6. Does Paul distinguish between soma christou ("body of Christ") and ekklesia (church) in 1 Corinthians? If he does so, why is it important to distinguish each other in the Corinthian context?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 6: Practicing the Diversity of Christ’s Body
The goal of this chapter is to contemplate on the diversity of Christ’s body. The central question is, How can we practice the metaphor of Christ’s body, not as a boundary marker but as a living metaphor of Christic body in a diverse, conflicted world today. This chapter leaves more questions than answers regarding the idea
of diversity. That is how the book ends because we should continue to work together about that topic; what it means to live out diversity today.
1. What is true diversity? How does the body of Christ have to do with the idea of diversity?
2. How is different, if any, between differences and diversity?
3. Is it possible to have a phrase like “critical diversity”? if possible, how can we get there?
[There are other languag versions also available: French, German, Spanish and Portuguese]
*Any way, I paste study guide here too:This studying and teaching guide was prepared by the author. The following discussion and reflection questions can be used in a class room or in a small group discussion or in any setting that allows the genuine spirit of studying and engaging, personal or public. Feel free to send email to the author if you have any questions: Yung Suk Kim at youaregood@yahoo.com. Thanks for visiting this page and for the use of my book for study and ministry. For more information, visit the book info page.
Introduction: The Price of Unity
The goal of this chapter is to let readers to understand the author’s approach and thesis of this whole book.
1. Why is it important to read the metaphor soma christou (body of Christ) differently than a metaphorical organism in particular? What are some concerns that are raised by the author?
2. How is a different reading of this metaphor possible or legitimate?
3. In today’s personal or public experiences in this world, does the use of this metaphor (body of Christ) raise any concerns?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 1: Community as “Body”
The goal of this chapter is to analyze a variety of conceptions of community. Different scholarly traditions or approaches (theological and historical approaches, sociological or social-scientific approaches, and the approach of the history-of-religions school) have different ideas about the community. The question is, which one is better, or do we need an alternative?
1. What are some criteria for division of various scholarly approaches to the community? Compare and contrast them (use terms such as boundaries, identity and structure or power relationships).
2. Can you name examples of each approach in today’s life experience (church, school, society and the world) to the conception of community?
3. What are some hidden ideologies at work in the level of interpreters?
4. Is it possible to have an alternative vision of community than the mentioned other approaches?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 2: Community as the “Body of Christ”
The goal of this chapter is to understand a variety of understandings about the metaphor “the body of Christ” in biblical studies. The question is, which one is better than the other, or do we need an alternative?
1. What are major differences between different approaches to the body of Christ (the approach of “organic unity,” the approach of “corporate solidarity” and “the christological approaches”)? Compare and contrast them.
2. What pros and cons can you find in each approach?
3. Can you name some examples of each approach in today’s life experience?
4. What is an alternative approach or understanding about the body of Christ? How can you
evaluate it?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 3: Community “in Christ”
The goal of this chapter is to deconstruct the view of “in Christ” as a boundary marker in 1 Corinthians. The language of “in Christ” in a Corinthian conflicting context can be understood as a cynical rhetoric of Paul’s protest to the hegemonic voice of an “in Christ” group in Corinth.
1. What are various functions of the preposition “in” (dative case) used in Paul’s letters?
2. How does “in Christ” have to do with Paul’s rhetoric that he uses to address Corinthian problems?
3. Can you find the Greco-Roman parallels to which Paul’s cynical language of “in Christ” might refer (1 Cor 4:10)?
4. Is the modal relation of “dying with Christ” consistent in Paul’s theology or in his letters in general?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 4: The Body Politic and the Body of Christ
The goal of this chapter has two parts. One is to take a look at the Greco-Roman and Jewish world in terms of body politic and to relate to Paul’s body politic through the metaphor “the body of Christ.” The other part is to illustrate cases of disembodiment of Christic body found in 1 Corinthians. The conclusion is that Paul takes side of the democratic-inclusive body, and that the Corinthian problems are criticized and deconstructed by this body politic with an emphasis on the deconstructive power of the cross (Christ crucified).
1. What are some major differences between the hegemonic body politic and the
democratic-inclusive body politic? Point out ideologies (philosophy) that support each body politic.
2. Which side of the body politic do you think Paul takes? Why?
3. What do you think is the central cause of the Corinthian problems mentioned in the letter? (divisions, sexual immorality, eating meat sacrifice to idols, etc).
4. Paul does not claim his rights as an apostle (benefits such as financial support). Does this rejection of financial support reflect his protest to the social system of patron-client in the Greco-Roman world?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 5: The Life of the “Body of Christ” in First Corinthians
The goal of this chapter is to examine the metaphor of “the body of Christ” in the whole letter with a focus on the discursive figurative structure of the body. One of the central key words is “Christic body” (rendered as an attributive genitive, Christlike body, as we see similarly in Rom 6:6: the body of sin as “sinful body”). There are three movements of body metaphor in this whole letter: body as cross, body as community and body as resurrection.
1. Does this outline of the discursive figurative structure in 1 Corinthians show distinctive issues and message in Corinthian situation?
2. Compare and contrast various genitive cases applied to the body of Christ? Namely, between 1) the objective genitive (a body belonging to Christ as an organism metaphor), 2) the subjective genitive (Christ’s own body as physical), 3) the attributive genitive (Christlike or Christic body).
3. Do inverted parallelisms in the analysis of the whole letter work in supporting the argument of the chapter and thesis of the whole book?
4. How can you account for the possible transformative relationship, if any, between the metaphor of the body of Christ, Paul and the Corinthian community?
5. What do you think about the difference between Paul's use of the metaphor of "the body of Christ" in 1 Corinthians and the later use by the authors of the so called Deutero-Pauline letters such as Ephesians and Colossians?
6. Does Paul distinguish between soma christou ("body of Christ") and ekklesia (church) in 1 Corinthians? If he does so, why is it important to distinguish each other in the Corinthian context?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 6: Practicing the Diversity of Christ’s Body
The goal of this chapter is to contemplate on the diversity of Christ’s body. The central question is, How can we practice the metaphor of Christ’s body, not as a boundary marker but as a living metaphor of Christic body in a diverse, conflicted world today. This chapter leaves more questions than answers regarding the idea
of diversity. That is how the book ends because we should continue to work together about that topic; what it means to live out diversity today.
1. What is true diversity? How does the body of Christ have to do with the idea of diversity?
2. How is different, if any, between differences and diversity?
3. Is it possible to have a phrase like “critical diversity”? if possible, how can we get there?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
