Abstract
In the ancient Mediterranean world any public admission of weakness reflected badly on one’s personal status and honour, as well as the public reputation of one’s group. However, in 1 Corinthians 15:8-10 Paul openly admits about being in error in the past regarding the true identity of Christ. Within the larger cultural framework of meaning, the apostle’s graphic confession redefines his prior existence as a form of physical pollution. His open admittance of error also introduces a fresh understanding of God who freely extends grace to the morally impure. Paul serves as the paradigm of the active presence of God’s grace, which ontologically transformed his religious status, as well as his understanding of Christ. In this new relationship, based solely on the grace of God, fitting responses by all grateful recipients entail public confessions of previous error and incessant hard work for the sake of Christ.
Highlights
In the ancient Mediterranean world any public admission of weakness reflected badly on one’s personal status and honour, as well as the public reputation of one’s group
Though most cultures insist that error is embedded in human nature, there seems to be a universal reluctance to admit personal error
Error is commonplace in human affairs because Homo sapiens are limited creatures whose needs and wants outrun their available capabilities
Summary
Since the public admittance of personal error and negative self-evaluation was intentionally avoided in the ancient Greco-Roman world, Paul’s graphic confession of his radical unworthiness in 1 Corinthians 15:8-10 is surprising. Paul does not describe the appearance of the resurrected Christ as a conversion experience This encounter embodied a radical shift in his understanding of the nature and content of his loyalty to God, typical “conversion” terminology is absent in 1 Corinthians 15.12 Rather, Paul’s existential experience of the resurrected Christ is about his entering into a new form of relationship with a patron, since in this case he did not change patrons (Crook 2004:255). In other words, he forged a new relationship with his divine benefactor, one in which Christ became his new master as well as the sole nehmen.’. The question still remains why he followed this route in a culture highly resistant to any form of public admittance regarding personal weaknesses or shameful behaviour
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
