[B-Greek] APOSTOLOS in 1 Cor 12

CWestf5155 at aol.com CWestf5155 at aol.com
Mon Aug 30 20:09:17 EDT 2004


<<In a message dated 8/30/2004 10:47:59 AM Mountain Standard Time, 
iver_larsen at sil.org writes:
>
[Cindy:]> I Cor. 9 refers to Barnabas as an apostle with apostle's rights.

As does Luke in Acts 14:14.

> What about
> the context in 2 Cor. 8:23 makes Titus, for instance, not a
> similar authority
> with similar rights to Barnabas?

I don't think we can deduce that from KOINWNOS or SUNERGOS. Only 23a talks
about Titus. 23b talks about the two other unnamed co-workers who had been
sent/commissioned by the churches, so APOSTOLOI EKKLHSIWN in this verse
refers to the two church emissaries, not Paul's assistant, Titus.

>  He was sent in an authoritative capacity to
> Crete, among other places.

No, he was left by Paul in Crete to wrap up some unfinished business with
clear instructions from Paul on what to do. (Tit 1:5). And then Paul gives
further written instructions in his letter to Titus. Titus is here portrayed
as an assistant to an apostle rather than an apostle in his own right. Paul
gives similar written instructions to his other assistant, Timothy.

> In these cases, the translations miscue the
> readers, not making a good interpretive decision, though I
> understand the basis of the interpretation.

If you are referring to 2 Cor 8:23, I don't see the basis for your
unconventional interpretation. I believe all the versions have made a good
interpretative decision here.

I think the definition of apostle and the distinction between ministries and
gifts go beyond b-Greek parameters, so will respond more fully off-list.>>
Iver,

You're right that Luke refers to Barnabas as an apostle in Acts 14:14--also 
in v. 4, so that's one correction.  I was parroting what I'd heard in the 
discussion--that Luke generally refers to the 12 as apostles.  These two verses are 
certainly the exception. 

I also agree with your correction that in 2 Cor 8:23, the two other ADELFOI 
are described as APOSTOLOI here--that was sloppy perusal on my part. The 
EITE...EITE signals a contrast between the description of Titus and the description 
of the other two.  The ADELFOI was most likely not inclusive of Titus, as I 
first assumed.

But the germane part of my argument is that the ADELFOI are APOSTOLOIS.  I 
hope that my sloppiness doesn't mess up the point--for me this isn't about Titus 
(though I disagree that being "left" could not the same as "sent" as a 
representative--I don't think that this has to be technically spatial).  This is 
about the "title" or designation of apostle/sent one, which is included in the 
list of spiritual gifts, being applied outside the circle of "the twelve" and 
Paul.

I think that the best discussion on 2 Cor 8:23 (that I've seen today) is in 
the Anchor Bible Commentary on 2 Cor 8-9 by Betz. He states that this is a 
formula of authorization, based on Hellenistic legal and administrative texts. In 
effect, Titus is given Paul's power of attourney/apostleship.  As far as the 
ADELFOI are concerned, Paul gives their official title and functions, and their 
title reflects their authorizing institution.  They are APOSTOLOIS of the 
churches, which he restates as representatives or delegates (note that this is 
really quite different than "messenger" (like mail carrier), but quite 
consistent with discussions in commentaries). There follows a rather brilliant 
analysis: "One cannot fail to notice the descrepancy between the high rank given them 
by the churches and the somewhat lower rank granted them by Paul".  Paul calls 
them ADELFOI not "fellow apostles".  Titus is given the higher endorsement: 
Paul's representational status.  The apostles do not have equal authority to 
Paul over the Corinthians--they don't have the same history

OK, so note that APOSTOLOIS is given a title status here.  I part ways with 
Betz when he says, "As has often been pointed out, this concept of apostle has 
little in common with Paul's use of the term".  So you're right that the 
consensus lies with you.  

However, I contest that Paul's application of the title APOSTOLOIS to these 
brothers is consistent with the term APOSTOLOS in I Cor. 12, 9, 15 etc. as well 
as 2 Cor 1:1.  And while I don't agree with you that it is idiosyncratic 
(there has been diversity on this passage--I'm taking it literally), it is not the 
consensus.  


APOSTOLOS has a full range of meaning.  Coincidentally, so does PROFHTHS.  I 
suggest that the term in 1 Cor 12 encompasses that range.  Not every APOSTOLOS 
has the same function (or field, in Pauliine terminology).  The two common 
elements appear to be commissioning (by primarily the Holy Spirit and 
secondarily the churches), and "sent" = the geographic crossing of boundaries between 
the local churches.  The authority of any apostle would be in direct proportion 
to the assigned field.

Cindy Westfall
Denver Seminary



More information about the B-Greek mailing list