in 1:17, when compared with 2:1–5 that also generally combines σοφία (“wisdom”) with λόγος (“speech”), provides us with a strong clue that Paul is referring primarily to speeches associated with sophist rhetoricians. Though at times wisdom distinguishes philosophers from sophists (Plato, Gorgias; Plutarch, De laude 12 [543E–F]), it was also understood in relation to those possessing practical expertise, cleverness, and rhetorical skill.110 Wisdom found special relevance in the rhetorical traditions of Greeks and Romans.111 Eloquence and wisdom were in fact closely aligned as the rhetorical handbooks confirm; the former, for example, Cicero perceives as “nothing else but wisdom delivering copious utterance” (Part. or. 23.XXIII.79).112 Paul speaks against a type of rhetoric similar to the sophists, which the Corinthians seem to hold in high esteem. Such speaking for Paul should never become the ground for disrupting fellowship, and it must not be permitted to eclipse the message of the cross that saves, transforms, and empowers lives.
75. Aristotle distinguishes between the “statement of the case” (πρόθεσις) and the proof for it (Rhet. 3.13.1–2). The Latin propositio is the equivalent (Witherington 1995:94).
76. See Inkelaar 2011:77–80, 143; Mitchell 1991:198–99; cf. 20–64, 68–111.
77. On narratio/diēgēsis, see e.g., Quintilian Inst. 4.2.1–3, 31; Cicero Inv. 1.19.27–30; Kennedy 1984:24.
78. The appeal, παρακαλῶ, commonly appears in deliberative rhetoric, whether in oratory or epistolary form (e.g., Isocrates Or. 5.13.114; Ep. 1.5; Demosthenes Ep. 1.10; Mitchell 1991:44).
79. See Trebilco 2012:26.
80. Cf. Plutarch Frat. amor. 2.1[478D–479B]; Collins 1999:71.
81. Likewise, παρακαλῶ is found both in official (Schnabel 2006:85) and private letters (Arzt-Grabner et al. 2006:58).
82. Cf. Steyn 1996:484.
83. To be restored (κατηρτισμένοι; see LSJ 910) is variously rendered “be made complete” (NASB), “be perfectly joined together” (AV), “be refurbished” (Garland 2003:40). The idea of restoration, of fixing what is broken, dislocated, or torn (σχίσμα can refer to a rift or tear) best fits the idea of a fragmented corporate body.
84. e.g., Polybius Hist. 5.104.1; Josephus A.J. 12.283; further, Malcolm 2013b:8–9; Welborn 1987b:85–107.
85. See Winter 2001:32, 38; Thiselton 2000:117.
86. See Introduction; Excursus at 2:1–5.
87. Other options include that they are business agents of Chloe (possibly a non-Christian from Ephesus: Fee 1987:54) or a woman’s group opposed to hierarchical structures of the factional groups (Schottroff 2012:720–21).
88. On slaves as couriers, see Richards 2004:181. On Stephanas as the courier back to Corinth, see 16:17.
89. See ἐδηλώθη and examples in Arzt-Grabner et al. 2006:59–64.
90. See further, Winter 2001:38–39.
91. Stasinus Cypria; Lucian Dial.d. 20; Mulroy 2012:80–82.
92. On ἔρις in vice lists, see 2 Cor 12:20; Gal 5:20; Rom 1:29; 13:13; 1 Clem. 35.5; 3 Bar. 8.5.
93. The genitive of relationship in Greek is used in 1:12: “I [am] of,” or more freely, “I belong to” (3:22–23).
94. See surveys in Adams/Horrell 2004:13–26; Sumney 1999:34–78; Merklein 1992:1.134-52; Hurd 1965:75–142.
95. If the four slogans are caricatures of Corinthian allegiances (so Mitchell 1991:83–86), the first three seem real regardless of the precise words congregants might have used.
96. Rightly, Strüder 2003:431–55. Similarly, Clarke 1993:92–93.
97. On Apollos’s eloquence, see Pogoloff 1992:181–83; Winter 2002:178. More speculatively, Welborn 2011:403–10, suggests that Apollos accepted financial support in Corinth, and Gaius was his patron.
98. “Peter” (Greek Petros), the name Jesus gave Simon (Matt 16:17–18), is equivalent to the Aramaic Kepha’ according to Fitzmyer 2008:143.
99. Revived recently by Goulder 2002. Against this view of the opponents in 2 Cor 3, see Oropeza 2016:232–38.
100. See Barrett 1982:28–39.
101. Prothro 2014:250–65, argues from the grammatical sequence “μέν . . . δὲ . . . δὲ . . .” in 1:12 that a break in the fourth claim, “I am of Christ” cannot be ruled out.
102. Conversely, see 12:14–17. The passive μερίζω in 1:13 suggests being “split up”: see LSJ 1103.
103. Nash 2009:18, provides a convenient list of Corinthian members.
104. Cf. Acts 18:8; Pascuzzi 2009:823–24.
105. Another option is that the perpetrators of this division gave “special authority” to baptize only to certain leaders but not others: cf. Schottroff 2012:720–21.
106. See Chester 2003:290, 303.
107.
