Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft. The Construction of 2 Corinthians 1,20 Revisited

Transcription

1 Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft The Construction of 2 Corinthians 1,20 Revisited For Preview Only Journal: Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft Manuscript ID: ZNTW Manuscript Type: Miszelle Date Submitted by the Author: 27-Feb-2012 Complete List of Authors: Khomych, Taras Classifications: Keywords: 2. Corinthians 1,20, Corinthian Community, God, Christ and the missionaries

2 The Construction of 2 Corinthians 1,20 Revisited Taras Khomych (Faculty of Theology, KU Leuven, Charles Deberiotstraat 26 - bus 3102, B 3000 Leuven, Belgium) Summary This contribution deals with the structure of 2Cor 1, As point of departure it takes and supports Edmund Hill s views that v. 20 consists of a series of short balanced expressions. At the same time, this article reveals a more complex structure, based on the syntax of this verse and the importance of the text which immediately precedes it, suggesting also a slightly different understanding of this obscure passage. Key words: 2Cor 1,19 20; Chiasmus; Ministry of Paul; dia; Ellipsis; Edmund Hill In his article The Construction of Three Passages from St. Paul, Edmund Hill made valuable linguistic observations concerning Rom 8,20 21; 2Cor 1,20 and 3,10. 1 His views on 2Cor 1,20, unfortunately, had very limited influence on scholarly interpretations. 2 This contribution aims to reappraise Hill s ideas about 2Cor 1,20. According to the majority of contemporary commentators, 2Cor 1,20 constitutes part of this letter s first major section in which Paul defends his own reliability (1,12-2,13 or, more narrowly, 1,15-2,1). In this context verses 1,19 22 are usually singled out as some sort of a theological digression, 3 in which Paul includes his own reflections on God s work in Christ as 1 E. Hill, The Construction of Three Passages from St. Paul, CBQ 23 (1961) For the bibliography on 2Cor 1,20 see R. Bieringer, E. Nathan & D. Kurek Chomycz, 2 Corinthians: A Bibliography (Biblical Tools and Studies 5), Leuven etc. 2008, esp See I. Dugandzic, Das Ja Gottes in Christus: Eine Studie zur Bedeutung des Alten Testaments für das Christusverständnis des Paulus (FzB 26), Würzburg 1977, esp. 24; C. Wolff, Der zweite Brief des Paulus an die Korinther (ThHK 8), Berlin 1989, esp. 32; V.P. Furnish, II Corinthians (AncB 32A), New York 1984, esp. 145; J.

3 2 follows: o{sai gavr ejpaggelivai qeou', ejn aujtw'/ tov naiv: diov kaiv di= aujtou' tov ajmhvn tw'/ qew'/ prov" dovxan di= hjmw'n. Edmund Hill, in the article mentioned above, offers his own observations about this passage, criticizing the RSV translation of the second part of the verse, which runs as follows: "That is why we utter the Amen through him, to the glory of God." Hill rightly, in my opinion, observes that this rendering does not do justice to the complex structure of this passage. He criticises first of all the translation to the glory of God, which would correspond to the Greek prov" dovxan tou' qeou' but not to the received text. 4 He aptly suggests that the Greek text as we have it now should best be understood in short jerks, linking tov ajmhvn with tw'/ qew'/ and prov" dovxan with di= hjmw'n. In view of this, Hill, secondly, points out that the RSV translation reduces to nothing the balance between di autou at the beginning and di êmôn at the end. 5 This all taken into account, he suggests the following translation of this passage: "Therefore it is also through him that the Amen goes to God at the doxa (which is offered) through us." 6 Hill s suggestions regarding the interpretation of 2Cor 1,20b have not been taken into account in more recent translations. The table below lists several such readings of the passage in question: Lambrecht, Second Corinthians (Sacra Pagina 8), Collegeville 1999, esp ; F.J. Matera, II Corinthians (NTLi), Louisville/London 2003, esp As M.J. Harris (The Second Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC), Grand Rapids 2005, 204) points out, Paul formulates the expression for the glory of God with eij" dovxan qeou' in 1Cor 10,31 and Phil 2,11. In view of that it seems very unlikely that in 2Cor 1,20 he would replace the genitive qeou~ with the dative qew'/ and reverse the word order in the phrase. 5 Hill, Construction (see n. 1), Italics original.

4 3 NRSV LEB 7 NABRE EÜ 8 TOB 9 For this reason it is Therefore also Therefore, the Darum rufen Aussi est-ce par through him that through him is Amen from us wir durch ihn lui que nous we say the the amen to the also goes through zu Gottes disons AMEN à Amen, to the Glory of God him to God for Lobpreis auch Dieu pour sa glory of God 10 through us glory das Amen gloire These translations fall under both points of Hill s criticism, except for NABRE, which clashes only with the second point. 11 In this contribution I would like to essentially support Hill s view of the passage as a series of short balanced expressions. At the same time, I would like to propose a more complex structure, based on the syntax of this verse and the importance of the text which immediately precedes it, implying also a slightly different understanding of the passage. 1. Syntactical Remarks The syntax of 2Cor 1,20 is remarkable for its use of ellipsis. This verse, as a matter of fact, does not contain any verb at all. This notwithstanding, most of the commentators and interpreters appear to have no serious problems supplementing these missing elements and clarifying the 7 Lexham English Bible, Bellingham Die Bibel: Altes und Neues Testament. Einheitsübersetzung, Freiburg Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, Paris Compare Art. ajmhvn, BDAG 3 (2000) 53-54, here 53 #1: therefore the amen is spoken through him to God s glory. 11 Amongst the recent commentators M.E. Thrall (A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ICC) vol. 1, London/New York , esp ) tends to follow Hill s observations most closely.

5 4 passage s meaning. 12 A quick comparison of various translations of 2Cor 1,20, however, makes one wonder whether the meaning of this verse is that evident after all. The interpreters typically provide no clear criteria for their choice of particular verbs and hence the diversity of translations and differences in the understanding of this passage. 13 Hill rightly reminds us of the complexity of this passage, making two very tentative criticisms of the RSV translation and offering an even more hesitant suggestion about the Apostle s meaning. 14 This hesitation is understandable, given the elliptic structure. Is it possible, however, to arrive at a more secure interpretation of the passage? In this case it would seem useful - if not essential - to look at whether the text itself could give us a clue as to how it should be interpreted. It is arguably the case with the passage at hand. 2. The Structure of 2 Corinthians 1,19 20 With the conjunction gavr 15 2Cor 1,20 is linked directly to what precedes it, namely v. 19, which does not use ellipsis and can thus be helpful in elucidating the meaning of the subordinate clause in v. 20. It is also worth noting that content wise, these two verses constitute a part of Paul s 12 Thrall (Second Epistle to the Corinthians (see n. 11), 148) states that in v. 20 the form of expression is elliptical but the sense is clear. The subsequent four pages in her commentary, containing exegetical debates regarding this verse s meaning, however, do not seem to confirm the second part of her statement. 13 For references see, for instance, Harris, Second Corinthians (see n. 4), Hill, Construction (see n. 1), On its use, see BDF, # 452.

6 5 meditation on God s work in Jesus Christ 16 (1,19 22), dealing with God s promises (19 20) 17 and the work of the Spirit (21 22). 18 This entire section, 2Cor 1,19 22, has caused some consternation amongst exegetes. The larger context of this passage, namely 2Cor 1,12-2,13 deals with the deferral of Paul s visit to Corinth. The apostle defends his own reliability, in spite of his change of plans. Having expressed his own sincerity with respect to the Corinthians (1,12 14), Paul goes on to justify the alteration of his travel plans (1,15 18 and 1,23-2,11), concluding with a short narrative about his arrival to Troas (2,12 13). In this framework he integrates some theological reflections (1,19 22), which raise the question of their relationship to the immediate context. 19 In this respect, however, it has been pointed out that this passage presents the principal evidence of Paul s claim in v. 18, 20 that his word is not ambiguous, by appealing to the unwavering and positive nature of the message he proclaimed - Jesus Christ, the Son of God (v. 19); and to the validation of that sure proclamation in the Corinthian use of the liturgical response Amen (v. 20). Finally (vv. 21, 22), Paul points to the constant activity of God in producing stability in Paul and the Corinthians - those who have been brought into intimate and dynamic relation with 16 Lambrecht, Second Corinthians (see n. 3), J.D.M. Derrett, Nai (2 Cor 1:19 20), Filologia Neotestamentaria 4 (1991) L.L. Belleville, Paul's Polemic and the Theology of the Spirit in Second Corinthians, CBQ 58 (1996) , esp Noting the (apparent) discrepancy, T.R. Glover (Paul of Tarsus, London 1927, 190) presented this passage as one of Paul s splendid and illuminative irrelevancies. Although not many scholars used this euphemism, several authors likewise emphasized the difference between this passage and its context, see R.H. Strachan, The Second Epistle to the Corinthians, London 1935, 55; E. B. Allo, Saint Paul: Seconde épître aux Corinthiens (EtB), Paris , 27. More recently J. Lambrecht (Second Corinthians (see n. 3), here 35) similarly commented that in a totally unexpected way Paul in presents his vision of salvation history and Jesus Christ Although some connection with the context can be detected, vv constitute a remarkable theological digression. 20 pistov" dev qeov" o@ti oj lovgo" hjmw~n oj prov" ujma~" oujk e!stin NaiV kaiv Ou! (2Cor 1,18).

7 6 Christ, who is God s secure and permanent Yes. 21 In what follows I shall argue that verses are indeed closely linked to their immediate context, providing the confirmation of Paul s claim about his reliability in v The passage s structure will facilitate our argumentation. Verses 19 and 20, in addition to the thematic and the syntactic links already mentioned, are characterized also by striking linguistic parallels, including the following: di= hjmw'n (in both verses), naiv ejn aujtw'/ (v. 19) - ejn aujtw'/ tov naiv (v. 20), and naiv (v. 19) - tov ajmhvn (v. 20). 23 It is worth noting, that these parallel expressions emerge in a concentric manner in these verses. In view of this 2Cor 1,19 20 appears to have a chiastic structure, which may be presented as follows: 21 Harris, Second Corinthians (see n. 4), W.C. van Unnik (Reisepläne und Amen-Sagen, Zusammenhang und Gedankenfolge in 2. Korinther , in: Studia Paulina in honorem Johannis de Zwaan, septuagenarii, ed. J.N. Sevenster & W.C. van Unnik, Haarlem 1953, ) argues that in vv there is a word-play on the Hebrew root mn, which keeps the entire passage logically together. Although attractive in some respect, Van Unnik s interpretation does not seem to take into account the fact that this word play would hardly be recognisable for the non-semitic addressees of this letter, see Furnish, II Corinthians (see n. 3), 147; Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians (see n. 11), 150 n Concerning the correspondence between naiv and ajmhvn, see, for example, Rev 1,7 (naiv ajmhvn) and 22,20 (naiv, e!rcomai tacuv, ajmhvn), and Barn 14,1 (here naiv is used in the sense of so be it, very close in meaning to ajmhvn), as noted by Derrett (Nai (see n. 17), 206). Compare Harris, Second Corinthians (see n. 4),

8 oj tou' qeou' gavr uijov" jihsou'" CristoV" 7 (a) oj ejn ujmi'n di= hjmw'n khrucqeiv", di= ejmou' kaiv Silouanou' kaiv Timoqevou, (b) oujk ejgevneto 24 naiv VV kaiv ou] (c) ajllav naiv ejn aujtw'/ gevgonen (c ) o{sai gavr ejpaggelivai qeou', ejn aujtw'/ tov naiv: (b ) diov kaiv di= aujtou' tov ajmhvn tw'/ qew'/ (a ) prov" dovxan di= hjmw'n. 25 In addition to the inverted parallel expressions, we further note that in this passage ideas are also repeated in a concentric order: the members (c, c ) refer to what happens in Christ; (b, b ) deal with Christ s own activity (or his mediation); and (a, a ) - with the endeavor of the missionaries. The central part of the chiasm (c, c ) notably employs the expression ejn aujtw, referring to what 24 The RSV, the NRSV and the NABRE translate givnomai with the verb to be here. Thomas Stegman (The Character of Jesus: The Linchpin to Paul's Argument in 2 Corinthians (AnaBib 158), Rome 2005, 139), however, correctly points out that in this context givnomai bears the stronger sense of come to be, indicating a change or an entry into a new condition. He summarises his own exegesis of this passage as follows: The language of 2 Cor 1:19 thus strongly suggests that something in the past occurred in connection with the human Jesus that resulted in the entrance into a new condition which continues to have effects in the present. 25 The text is that of NA 27. Below we provide the English translation, which follows the Greek text as closely as possible: For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, (a) who was proclaimed among you by us, Silvanus and Timothy and I, (b) did not become Yes and No; (c) but the Yes has come to be in him. (c ) For all the promises of God - Yes in him. (b ) That is why through/by him - the Amen to God (a ) for glory through/by us.

9 8 has come to be in Christ. This Pauline expression denotes here a divine activity: 26 God has fulfilled God s promises in Christ (c ). 27 The next phrase (b ) focuses on the activity of Christ (or his mediation) in relation to God: Christ is associated with the Amen, the affirmation of God s will. 28 It is worth observing that in this passage the theological reflections (b, c, c, b ) are encircled by references to the activity of Paul and his fellows (a, a ). This last point, the apostolic action, is in fact at stake here, as the context of this passage makes it clear. The actual interpretation of v. 20, however, is concealed by its elliptic structure. Thus, whereas the (a) member identifies Paul s activity with the proclamation explicitly, (a ) lacks any such reference. At the same time, the latter contains an additional element prov" dovxan, unparalleled in (a). Noting the presence of the terms dovxa and ajmhvn in this verse, scholars typically tend to conclude that this passage refers to a communal prayer or a community worship in general. 29 This interpretation, however, is not without difficulty, since there is no clear reference to the community in this verse. 26 A.J.M. Wedderburn, Some Observations on Paul s Use of Phrases In Christ and With Christ, JSNT 25 (1985) 83 97, esp Scholars tend to agree that in this passage the expression ejpaggelivai qeou~ stands for God s promises in the Scripture. It is not clear, however, which promises exactly are meant here. M.J. Harris (Second Corinthians (see n. 4), 202) suggests that Paul refers to an indeterminate number of OT promises regarding the new age that God gave, while H. Frankemölle (Die paulinische Theologie im Kontext der heiligen Schriften Israels: So viele Verheißungen Gottes, in ihm das Ja (2 Kor 1.20), NTS 48 (2002) ) insists that the apostle has in mind only very specific passages of the Hebrew Bible. Whatever the correct interpretation, this issue does not affect our overall argument here. 28 Thrall (Second Epistle to the Corinthians (see n. 11), 150) sees a parallel to this passage in Phil 2,8. For a possible scriptural background to it in Isa 65,15 16, see A.T. Hanson, The Paradox of the Cross in the Thought of St Paul (JSNT.S 17), Sheffield 1987, esp For the references see Harris, Second Corinthians (see n. 4),

10 3. Community or the Missionaries? 9 Some scholars understand the expression di= hjmw'n in v. 20 as a reference to the community in general. Harris, for instance, recognizing that 2Cor 1,19 and 21 clearly distinguish between hjmei'" (referring to Paul and his fellow ministers) and ujmei'" (the Christian community at large), at the same time notes a difference between these two verses. He points out that in v. 19 hjmei'" (preachers) is clearly opposed to ujmei'" (hearers), whereas in v. 21 the two pronouns are associated on an equal footing. Harris argues then that v. 20 with its liturgical acclamation ( Amen ) represents a transition from hjmei'" as Christian preachers (v. 19) to hjmei'" as all Christians (vv. 21b, 22 twice). 30 This argumentation is somewhat confusing, since Paul does maintain the we and you distinction in vv. 19 and 21a. It seems unlikely that he blurred the difference between the two passages in v Taking this into account, other commentators argue that the more natural referent of hjmei'" in v. 20 is Paul with his fellow-missionaries. 32 At the same time, noting the liturgical overtones of the passage, such as the terms ajmhvn and dovxa, some of these scholars are inclined to think that the presence of the liturgical community is 30 Harris, Second Corinthians (see n. 4), 204. Compare H. Windisch, Der zweite Korintherbrief, Göttingen 1924, esp ; C.K. Barrett, A Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, London 1973, esp. 78; R. Bultmann, Der zweite Brief an die Korinther, Göttingen 1976, esp. 45; Furnish, II Corinthians (see n. 3), Moreover, contrary to the dominant scholarly opinion, it is far from clear that in vv. 21b and 22 the first person plural pronouns refer to all the Christians/the Corinthian Christians and not to Paul (and his fellow ministers) only; see P.L. Hammer, Canon and Theological Variety: A Study in the Pauline Tradition, ZNW 67 (1976) 83 89, esp ; C.E.B. Cranfield, Changes of Person and Number in Paul s Epistles, in: Paul and Paulinism. FS Barrett, London 1982, , esp Cranfield, Changes of Person (see n. 31), 286. Compare A. Plummer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle of St Paul to the Corinthians (ICC), Edinburg 1915, esp. 38; P.E. Huges, Paul s Second Epistle to the Corinthians (NIC), Grand Rapids 1962, esp. 38; M. Carrez, La deuxième Épître de Saint Paul aux Corinthiens, Geneva 1986, esp. 60; Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians (see n. 11), 150; A. Pitta, La seconda lettera ai Corinzi, Roma 2006, esp. 116.

11 10 presumed, although not clearly stated in this verse. Translations of this passage, accordingly, tend to supplement the ostensibly missing reference to the liturgical congregation with yet another personal pronoun we, which would stand for Christ s followers in general or the Corinthians plus Paul (and his colleagues) in particular. 33 This way the preposition diav in the expression di= hjmw'n is interpreted as a marker of instrumentality, so that the function of the missionaries appears to be subjected to the role of the main actor, the ecclesial we. We need to keep in mind, however, that this sentence has no explicit reference to such a liturgical community. In view of this, some authors opt for a more literal translation here. Jan Lambrecht for instance cautiously renders this verse as follows: [T]herefore, through him, too, the amen (goes) to God for his glory, through us. 34 Interpreting this passage, however, he implies immediately the presence of the unexpressed ecclesial community, which utters the Amen through the double mediation of Christ (di= aujtou') and of the missionaries (di= hjmw'n). 35 It is worth observing that diav does not always imply the sense of instrumentality. In a genitive construction, this preposition may also refer to the originator of an action. This use of diav is attested both in classical 36 and biblical Greek 37 and, significantly for our purposes, also in 33 So Pitta, La seconda lettera ai Corinzi (see n. 32), 116 ( perciò anche per mezzo di lui (sale) a Dio il nostro amen per la gloria, mediante noi ). 34 Lambrecht, Second Corinthians (see n. 3), here Lambrecht, Second Corinthians (see n. 3), 29, 35. Compare Frankemölle s translation: Deswegen auch durch ihn das Amen Gott zur Verherrlichung durch uns (Die paulinische Theologie (see n. 27), here 333). Contrary to Lambrecht, however, he does not interpret the phrase durch uns as an expression of a mediatory role of missionaries only but suggests that the first person plural pronoun here includes both Paul and the Corinthians as he states: Paulus sieht in einem banalen Anlass die Gefahr eines grundsätzlichen Verlustes an Zuverlässigkeit für seine eigene Person und seine Botschaft und greift, um diese zu überwinden, in einer digressio argumentativ auf einen theologischen Grundkonsens zurück, von dem er annimmt, dass die korinthische Gemeinde mit ihm darin übereinstimmt, wie das den Verfasser und die Adressaten inkludierende Wir und das gemeinsame Amen verdeutlichen (here 334). 36 Art. diav, LSJ 9 (1996)

12 11 the Pauline epistles (see, for example, Rom 11,36; 1Cor 1,9; 2Cor 1,11). Most importantly, however, diav expressing causality occurs at the beginning of our chiasm twice, namely in v. 1,19a. The expression di= hjmw'n khrucqeiv", di= ejmou' kaiv Silouanou' kaiv Timoqevou obviously implies that hjmei~", i.e. Paul, Silvanus and Timothy, did the proclamation. Accordingly, the passage is rendered with proclaimed by us, meaning that we (Paul, Silvanus and Timothy) proclaimed Jesus Christ. This member (a) of the chiasm corresponds to its last part (a ), both containing the same expression di= hjmw'n. Taking into account this correspondence and the relatively straightforward meaning of the (a) member of the chiasm, it may be suggested that the obscurity of (a ) might best be elucidated with the help of (a). In this case, the meaning of the phrase di= hjmw'n in (a ) would be the same as or similar to that in (a), namely by us (Paul, Silvanus and Timothy). 38 Interpreted in this way, the entire expression for glory by us (prov" dovxan di= hjmw'n) still remains rather enigmatic as it is not entirely clear what is the relationship between the expression prov" dovxan and di= hjmw'n since this clause has no verb. We suggest that the parallelism between v. 19 and v. 20 can further elucidate the difficulty. As we have already mentioned Paul uses elliptic syntax in 2Cor 1,20, namely in the second part of this chiasm (c b a ). It is noteworthy that the missing verbs in each of these elliptic constructions can be reasonably supplemented with the verbs from 2Cor 1,19, and more precisely from the corresponding members of the first part of the chiasm (abc). Accordingly, 37 See Art. diav, BDAG 3 (2000) , esp. 225 # This is not to rule out completely the possibility that the ecclesial we is implied in this passage but to indicate the emphasis, which clearly falls on Paul and his companions. It may also be pointed out that elsewhere Paul uses ujpov plus the genitive construction to refer (more clearly) to the originator of an action, as in case of 2Cor 11,24. Using diav in 1,19 20, on the other hand, he could express some sort of instrumentality, implying that the ultimate origin of Christ s activity and the missionaries proclamation is God. If true, this interpretation would not contradict our point: it is possible that Paul emphasised the role of his own ministry in this passage, while suggesting at the same time that God was at the origin of that activity.

13 12 the members (b ) and (c ) may easily incorporate a form of the verb givnomai from (b) and (c) correspondingly. 39 Similarly, di= hjmw'n of the member (a ) appears to correspond to di= hjmw'n khrucqeiv" of the (a) member. Interpreted in this way, the phrase di= hjmw'n of 2Cor 1,20, hardly comprehensible on its own, should be understood in light of di= hjmw'n khrucqeiv" of 2Cor 1,19 (a) as referring to the apostolic proclamation, the Christian ministry. 40 This suggestion is supported by the immediate context (vv ), where Paul focuses on his ministry, so that the reference to the proclamation in v. 20 is rather expected. Furthermore, the use of dovxa in this letter points towards the same line of interpretation. In 2 Corinthians dovxa with no qualifier appears, besides the passage in question, also in 3,7 11, where it refers again to Paul s ministry and also to the ministry of Moses. 41 This all taken into account, it can be concluded that in v. 20 Paul is preoccupied with the reliability of his own ministry, relating it to the fidelity of Christ and the promises of God. 42 In sum, 2Cor 1,17 20 presents the situation in which Paul s personal behavior (v. 17) and his words (v. 18), including his proclamation, become the subject of distrust on the part of the Corinthians. In these circumstances Paul attempts to establish his own reliability on the authority, reliability and truthfulness of God and God s Son, Jesus Christ. Paul elaborates his argument using parallelism between Christ and himself (and his fellows). In doing so, he links 39 Interestingly, Bultmann (Der zweite Brief an die Korinther (see n. 30), 44) also suggests that in v. 20 the phrase ejn aujtw'/ tov naiv should be understood as gevgonen ejn aujtw'/ tov naiv. 40 Thrall, Second Epistle to the Corinthians (see n. 11), So e.g. 2Cor 3,9: eij gavr th~/ diakoniva/ th~" katakrivsew" dovxa, pollw~/ ma~llon perisseuvei hj diakoniva th~" dikaiosuvnh" dovxh/ (For if there was glory in the ministry of condemnation, by much more will the ministry of righteousness overflow with glory) (LEB). 42 This passage illustrates how Paul combines his theological thought with the reflections on his own ministry (pace Glover et al., see n. 19). As Morna D. Hooker (Interchange in Christ and Ethics, JSNT 25 (1985) 3 17, here 4) pointed out: Paul s logic holds divine grace and human response firmly together: without the mercies of God, men are not able to respond to God in true worship; when they experience them, then response to the demand to acknowledge God and to give him glory becomes both imperative and feasible.

14 13 his own ministry to Christ s activity as follows: God made His promises true in Christ; that is why through/by Christ there comes the definitive assertion - the Amen - to God; as a result, the apostle and his fellow ministers spread out God s glory through their proclamation, announcing the fulfillment of God s promises. Thus, the reliability of God is reflected in Christ s reliability and both constitute the core and the pledge of Paul s proclamation. The larger community of the faithful does not come into focus in this passage but rather functions as a recipient of the divine activity and of the missionaries proclamation. 2Cor 1,20 may thus be interpreted as follows: For all the promises of God [become] Yes in him. That is why through/by him [there comes to be] the Amen to God for [the] glory [of God] by us. 4. Concluding Remarks In the beginning of this contribution we revisited Hill s observations concerning 2Cor 1,20, supporting his suggestion that this passage consists of a series of short balanced expressions. At the same time, our own analysis of the syntax and the context of this verse revealed a more complex chiastic structure, which opened up new possibilities for a better understanding of the text. Our major conclusion in this respect is twofold. On the negative side, we challenged the predominant way of interpreting the Amen in v. 20 as a response of the Corinthian community at large, since the community is not explicitly mentioned there and the context of this verse does not seem to support such an interpretation. On the positive side, we indicated that in the passage at hand Paul is preoccupied with the ministry of proclamation, linking it to the activity of Christ and of God. In this respect, the primary focus of the passage is on God, Christ and the missionaries, especially Paul, whose words and works were challenged by the addressees of this letter. The congregation could be envisioned as a recipient of the divine and human activities described in the passage and not so much an actor on its own. In the larger context of Paul s

15 14 argument (especially vv ), v. 20 seems to express an implicit reproach by Paul, pointing to his divine commission and unfailing labors on behalf of the community, a community that does not grasp what is essential but only complains about some secondary matters.