Though historically, the arrangement of the New Testament has not been seen as so ordered to flow theologically from one book to the next. That is, the various books of the New Testament do not seem to be arranged so as to pit one Church against another in order to prove a theological point. What is meant by this may be illustrated in the current book now under consideration; 1 Corinthians. As has just been discussed, the Apostle Paul ended his letter to the Church in Rome on somewhat of a high note. Paul commended the believers in Rome on their open demonstration of service to the body of Christ and their unashamed acceptance of the Gospel. In turning his attention to the Church at Corinth, a different atmosphere exists all together. It has been surmised that Paul may have written as many as five or six letters to the Church at Corinth of which only two are extant. The book of 1 Corinthians seems to be the second or third letter Paul wrote to this Church in light of his apparent responses to questions asked by the Church. The book of 2 Corinthians which will be examined later appears to follow a similar pattern of addressing questions asked by the Church; some in response to Paul’s first return letter here and some on previously unattended subjects. Though there is a sharp contrast between these two Churches and hence Paul’s letters, the overall arrangement of the New Testament does not seem to be so arranged to highlight this. Rather, the arrangement of books follows a general order of gospel narrative (Matthew to John), historical (Acts), epistolary (Romans to Jude) and then apocalyptic (Revelation) with various books within each section arranged in a longest to shortest fashion. With the only exception to this arrangement being the book of Hebrews which consists of thirteen chapters and is situated between Philemon and James; the reasoning for this will not be addressed here.
The Church’s Problem With Divisions
Whatever thematic scheme one may subscribe to the most helpful presentation of the New Testament is one that if considered holistically does offer a sense of the theological progression between the various books that should, at least in some measure, be considered. In the present case, the contrast between the Roman and Corinthian Churches is beneficial. It appears that the theological underpinnings given in the letter to the Romans had not been put into practice in Corinth. This is not to say that the Church at Corinth was apostate; rather, the practical outworking of a Gospel salvation was having to be met out in very real people with very real misunderstandings of what it means to be the Church. Historically, it seems that Corinth was almost exclusively Gentile and more specifically, Gentile that has previously worshiped in a very pagan way. The issue of an applied syncretism was at the root of the various problems manifest in Corinth and Paul’s letter to this Church is not primarily theological but practical; albeit, Paul’s answers to the Church are firmly rooted in theology and in fact provide a solid exposition on what it means to be the Church.
Older
Top
