What do you think?
Rate this book
Paul Through Mediterranean Eyes: Cultural Studies in 1 Corinthians
In this ground-breaking study of Paul's first epistle to the Corinthians, Kenneth Bailey examines this canonical letter through Paul's Jewish socio-cultural and rhetorical background and through the Mediterranean context of its Corinthian recipients.
560 pages, Paperback
First published September 1, 2011
137 people are currently reading
1029 people want to read
About the author
Kenneth E. Bailey
32 books121 followersAfter undergraduate and seminary studies, Dr. Bailey completed degrees in Arabic Language and Literature, Systematic Theology and a doctorate in New Testament. Ordained by the Presbyterian Church (USA), Dr. Bailey spent 40 years (1955-1995) living and teaching in seminaries and institutes in Egypt, Lebanon, Jerusalem and Cyprus.
For 20 of those years Dr. Bailey was Professor of New Testament and Head of the Biblical Department of the Near East School of Theology in Beirut where he also founded and directed the Institute for Middle Eastern New Testament Studies. From September 1985 to June 1995, Dr. Bailey was on the faculty of "The Ecumenical Institute for Theological Research" in Jerusalem, with the title of Research Professor of Middle Eastern New Testament Studies.
In 1990 Dr. Bailey accepted the additional responsibility of Canon Theologian for the Episcopal Diocese of Cyprus and the Gulf, residing in Nicosia, Cyprus and returned a third of each year to Jerusalem to continue teaching at the Ecumenical Institute.
Dr. Bailey's area of specialty is the cultural background and literary forms of the New Testament. In addition to more than 150 articles in English and in Arabic, his writings include:
Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes (Downer’s Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2008)
“Open Hearts in Bethlehem (A Christmas Musical)” (Louisville: W/JK, 2005)
The Cross and the Prodigal [Revised edition] (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2005)
Jacob and the Prodigal: How Jesus Retold Israel’s Story (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2003 )
Finding the Lost: Cultural Keys to Luke 15 (St. Louis: Concordia, 1992)
Poet and Peasant and Through Peasant Eyes (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, l980)
God Is ... Dialogues on the Nature of God [Revised Edition] (Toronto: FFM, 2005)
Dr. Bailey has authored the scripts for two professionally produced feature length films and has also professionally recorded more than 100 video lectures on a variety of New Testament themes. He has taught at Columbia and Princeton and was for a time an adjunct professor at Dubuque, McCormick and Pittsburgh theological seminaries as well as at Fuller Seminary. Dr. Bailey has lectured in theological colleges and seminaries in England (Oxford, Cambridge, Bristol) Ireland, Canada, Egypt, Finland, Latvia, Denmark, New Zealand, Australia and Jerusalem. He is active as a Bible teacher for conferences and continuing education events in the Middle East, Europe and North America. His writings have been translated and published into more than 20 languages. He is a member of Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas and is listed in Who's Who in Biblical Studies and Archeology (Washington: Biblical Archeology Society, 1992). In March 1995, at the request of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Bailey was the Bible teacher for the triennial meeting of the Archbishops of the Anglican Communion. In 1999 he received the Pittsburgh Theological Seminary “Distinguished Alumni Award for Excellence in Academics.” In 2003, at the invitation of the Archbishop of Canterbury, he participated in a Muslim-Christian dialogue conference held in Doha, Qatar.
The Baileys now reside in New Wilmington, Pennsylvania. Dr. Bailey continues his ministry of lecturing, writing and recording in the field of New Testament. In June 1997, he was installed as Canon Theologian of the Diocese of Pittsburgh of the Episcopal Church, USA.
Mrs. Ethel Bailey was a research assistant to Dr. Jonas Salk at the time he discovered the polio vaccine. She taught microbiology (in Arabic), raised a family, and typed a number of Dr. Bailey's manuscripts. In Beirut she was the recording secretary for the board of the American Community School. While in Jerusalem she was active in the leadership of daily worship at the Tantur Ecumenical Institute and in various other aspects of the life of the community. The Baileys have two children.
For 20 of those years Dr. Bailey was Professor of New Testament and Head of the Biblical Department of the Near East School of Theology in Beirut where he also founded and directed the Institute for Middle Eastern New Testament Studies. From September 1985 to June 1995, Dr. Bailey was on the faculty of "The Ecumenical Institute for Theological Research" in Jerusalem, with the title of Research Professor of Middle Eastern New Testament Studies.
In 1990 Dr. Bailey accepted the additional responsibility of Canon Theologian for the Episcopal Diocese of Cyprus and the Gulf, residing in Nicosia, Cyprus and returned a third of each year to Jerusalem to continue teaching at the Ecumenical Institute.
Dr. Bailey's area of specialty is the cultural background and literary forms of the New Testament. In addition to more than 150 articles in English and in Arabic, his writings include:
Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes (Downer’s Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2008)
“Open Hearts in Bethlehem (A Christmas Musical)” (Louisville: W/JK, 2005)
The Cross and the Prodigal [Revised edition] (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2005)
Jacob and the Prodigal: How Jesus Retold Israel’s Story (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2003 )
Finding the Lost: Cultural Keys to Luke 15 (St. Louis: Concordia, 1992)
Poet and Peasant and Through Peasant Eyes (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, l980)
God Is ... Dialogues on the Nature of God [Revised Edition] (Toronto: FFM, 2005)
Dr. Bailey has authored the scripts for two professionally produced feature length films and has also professionally recorded more than 100 video lectures on a variety of New Testament themes. He has taught at Columbia and Princeton and was for a time an adjunct professor at Dubuque, McCormick and Pittsburgh theological seminaries as well as at Fuller Seminary. Dr. Bailey has lectured in theological colleges and seminaries in England (Oxford, Cambridge, Bristol) Ireland, Canada, Egypt, Finland, Latvia, Denmark, New Zealand, Australia and Jerusalem. He is active as a Bible teacher for conferences and continuing education events in the Middle East, Europe and North America. His writings have been translated and published into more than 20 languages. He is a member of Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas and is listed in Who's Who in Biblical Studies and Archeology (Washington: Biblical Archeology Society, 1992). In March 1995, at the request of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Bailey was the Bible teacher for the triennial meeting of the Archbishops of the Anglican Communion. In 1999 he received the Pittsburgh Theological Seminary “Distinguished Alumni Award for Excellence in Academics.” In 2003, at the invitation of the Archbishop of Canterbury, he participated in a Muslim-Christian dialogue conference held in Doha, Qatar.
The Baileys now reside in New Wilmington, Pennsylvania. Dr. Bailey continues his ministry of lecturing, writing and recording in the field of New Testament. In June 1997, he was installed as Canon Theologian of the Diocese of Pittsburgh of the Episcopal Church, USA.
Mrs. Ethel Bailey was a research assistant to Dr. Jonas Salk at the time he discovered the polio vaccine. She taught microbiology (in Arabic), raised a family, and typed a number of Dr. Bailey's manuscripts. In Beirut she was the recording secretary for the board of the American Community School. While in Jerusalem she was active in the leadership of daily worship at the Tantur Ecumenical Institute and in various other aspects of the life of the community. The Baileys have two children.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 53 reviews
October 24, 2012
This is another solid contribution to the field of New Testament studies from Kenneth E. Bailey. Not quite as enjoyable or as potentially useful to the working pastor as his fine "Jesus through Middle-Eastern Eyes," it nonetheless contains several very helpful passages.
Bailey's approach continues to be based on his knowledge of ancient and modern Middle-Eastern languages and his experience of life in Middle-Eastern villages, which have changed little since the time of Christ. In "Paul through Mediterranean Eyes," he turns from the Gospels and the parables of Jesus to Paul's first letter to the Corinthians. He is able to provide several insights concerning Paul's Jewish heritage and the lives of his converts in Corinth.
Two things remove this book from the four star ranking I've previously given some of Bailey's work. First, there is a sense that in dealing with the Corinthian milieu Bailey is slightly out of his element. He is, after all, an expert in the area of the agrarian Levant rather than the urban centers of Rome. Secondly, much of his approach in this book is built off of a thorough knowledge of Hebrew and Greek rhetoric. Form criticism is, in general, of interest only to the specialist. It doesn't preach well.
Still, this book is well worth reading and I recommend it with the reservation that it will not be as immediately applicable for the working preacher in search of insights for his or her congregation. I would rank it with most commentaries on I Corinthians rather than as the kind of breakthrough in Biblical cultural studies represented by "Jesus through Middle-Eastern Eyes."
Bailey's approach continues to be based on his knowledge of ancient and modern Middle-Eastern languages and his experience of life in Middle-Eastern villages, which have changed little since the time of Christ. In "Paul through Mediterranean Eyes," he turns from the Gospels and the parables of Jesus to Paul's first letter to the Corinthians. He is able to provide several insights concerning Paul's Jewish heritage and the lives of his converts in Corinth.
Two things remove this book from the four star ranking I've previously given some of Bailey's work. First, there is a sense that in dealing with the Corinthian milieu Bailey is slightly out of his element. He is, after all, an expert in the area of the agrarian Levant rather than the urban centers of Rome. Secondly, much of his approach in this book is built off of a thorough knowledge of Hebrew and Greek rhetoric. Form criticism is, in general, of interest only to the specialist. It doesn't preach well.
Still, this book is well worth reading and I recommend it with the reservation that it will not be as immediately applicable for the working preacher in search of insights for his or her congregation. I would rank it with most commentaries on I Corinthians rather than as the kind of breakthrough in Biblical cultural studies represented by "Jesus through Middle-Eastern Eyes."
February 16, 2017
I recall learning in seminary that the ancient Hebrews thought, and wrote, differently then we do today and this difference is a big obstacle to understanding their writing. Where we tend to write in a linear way so that the argument builds to a climax at the end (A-B-C-D), the Hebrews (Biblical prophets, Psalms)often wrote in a way that the main point is in the middle and everything surrounding it mirrors each other (A-B-C-B-A).
The crux of Bailey's argument is that since Paul was a Jewish Pharisee (rabbi) then it makes sense that he would also use this same style. In other words, if the scripture Paul read was filled with this then it is probably how he thought too. Bailey sees this clearly in Paul's letter to the Corinthian church. He says that while scholars have tended to see 1 Corinthians as thrown together in response to problems in the church it is actually a well-thought out, intricately crafted series of essays that is for the whole, universal church, though it is motivated by specific concerns in Corinth.
This is not a traditional dry commentary. It is a fantastic book and a must-read for any student of the Bible. It was the primary book I used in teaching 1 Corinthians on campus this semester.
The crux of Bailey's argument is that since Paul was a Jewish Pharisee (rabbi) then it makes sense that he would also use this same style. In other words, if the scripture Paul read was filled with this then it is probably how he thought too. Bailey sees this clearly in Paul's letter to the Corinthian church. He says that while scholars have tended to see 1 Corinthians as thrown together in response to problems in the church it is actually a well-thought out, intricately crafted series of essays that is for the whole, universal church, though it is motivated by specific concerns in Corinth.
This is not a traditional dry commentary. It is a fantastic book and a must-read for any student of the Bible. It was the primary book I used in teaching 1 Corinthians on campus this semester.
October 15, 2011
There is a pernicious Euro-American centricity that undergirds much of our understanding and perspective on the Scripture, which is why I am thankful that a number of scholars are taking a new look at the social, cultural, and rhetorical foundation that those Scriptures are rooted in order to help us re-capture a non-Western and pre-Western perspective on the Text.
Enter Kenneth Bailey's new book "Paul Through Mediterranean Eyes: Cultural Studies in 1 Corinthians."
Bailey joins the likes of Ben Witherington--for which he is eminently known--in examining the socio-rhetorical-culture milieu that Paul's First Letter to the Church at Corinth is mired in. And Bailey seeks to pull the reader's head out of the sand of Euro-American centrism and into the new, fresh air of the Middle East by giving them Middle Eastern eyes. As Bailey states, "in the wider world, Middle Eastern Christians are often forgotten. The current discussions of the emergence of the Christian 'Global South' and its numerical dominance over Christians in Western Europe and North America, overlooks the Middle East entirely. Have already discussed a few topics in the Gospels in the light of important Middle Eastern Christian sources, this volume intends to focus similar attention on 1 Corinthians." (18)
Over the past forty years or so as Bailey has worked through this text, he says "at critical points in the text, I have asked, 'How did Middle Eastern Christians across the centuries understand this text?'" Bailey sets out to answer this question throughout his examination of 1 Corinthians. He has three basic concerns in his approach to 1 Corinthians: 1) Paul, a Middle Eastern Jewish Christian, uses rhetorical styles that were available to him in the writings of the Hebrew prophets; 2) Middle Eastern life and literature is of assistance in recovering and bringing to life Paul's metaphors and parables; and 3) he examines 23 representative samples of the long heritage of Syriac, Arabic, and Hebrew translations of 1 Corinthians. (19)
Bailey begins by arguing that 1 Cor is Paul's most contemporary letter, holding along with an apparent cloud of witnesses throughout the historic Church (including Ambrosiaster, Chrysostom, Bishr ibn al-Sari, and Calvin) that this letter is not simply occasional but written to all the Church. And it's a letter "with a carefully designed inner coherence that exhibits amazing precision in composition and admirable grandeur in overall theological concept" with "five carefully constructed essays, which themselves showcase a discernible theological method." (25)
Here's Bailey's thematic outline:
I. The Cross ad Christian Unity 1:5--4:16
II. Men and Women in the Human Family 4:17--7:40
III. Food Offered to Idols (Christian and Pagan) 8:1--11:1
IV. Men and Women in Worship 11:2--14:40
V. The Resurrection 15
He also argues this outline reveals three principle ideas: the cross and resurrection (I, V); Men and women in the human family and in worship (II, IV); and Christian living among pagans (III).
I find both this outline and these three principle ideas helpful, if not innovative. A glance through my commentaries on 1 Corinthians--Fee, Thiselton, Collins, Ciampa/Rosner, and Witherington--don't share his thematic outline, though Collins comes close who identifies 6 rhetorical "demonstrations." And from what I remember, and in my review of these commentaries in light of this review, I don't recall them drawing out the Hebraic rhetorical style that Bailey centers upon. In fact the most recent addition to the 1 Corinthians commentary library from Ciampa and Rosner state Paul uses Graeco-Roman rhetoric. Except a Hebraic rhetorical style culled from the prophets themselves is what Bailey argues for: "Using his own Jewish literary tradition, he built on the rhetoric of the classical writing prophets and composed a series of masterpieces not the topics he selected." (27)
He also argues that rather than being an occasional letter written specifically to the Church at Corinth, Paul "looked at the specific problems that surfaced in Corinth and selected some of them. The topics he chose were those that new Christian communities were debating in many places. He then composed 1 Cor and sent a copy to Corinth and to churches everywhere. He did address Corinthians and at the same time, he invited the rest of the Church to 'listen in' on his 'phone conversation' hoping to serve the entire church." This is why he argues the book is composed of five carefully constructed essays. (27) This seems to fly in the face of prevailing modern commentaries, which D. G. Dunn states and whom Ciampa and Rosner quote: "1 Corinthians cannot be properly understood unless it is read against the backdrop of its historical context and as part of a dialogue with the Corinthian church itself." I'm sure Bailey would agree with this to some extent, but ultimately would move beyond what appears to be a straightjacket approach to interpreting the letter by doing so in broader, general sense. Here is how he summarizes his argument:
it appears when a long list of problems surfaced in Corinth, Paul selected those of general concern and addressed both the Corinthians and the church at large in a single letter. For this extraordinarily well-constructed, important document Paul reached back into his own Jewish past and co-opted rhetorical styles sanctified by the classical writing prophets...The result was one of Paul's finest efforts and it can indeed by called "Paul's most contemporary epistle." (30)
Again, an interesting methodological position, but also seemingly innovative in comparison to the modern exegetical tradition. That's not to say it's a bad thing. But I think it's a supplemental position, since it does seem to be an unusual one.
Additionally, as mentioned before, Bailey uses his extensive Middle Eastern background--which amounts to 40 years worth living and teaching experience in Egypt, Lebanon, Cyprus, and Jerusalem--and historical commentaries from the Middle East that stretch from the 4th through the 5th centuries to illumine Paul's use of metaphor and parable. As we've come to realize over the past few decades, getting the 1st century backdrop to Paul and his letter-receiving communities is important. Bailey seeks to do so by emphasizing the Middle Eastern nature of that backdrop, which he does in his own unique way. And while this way is a good supplemental way, I wonder how safe that way is considering how informed it is by "how Middle Eastern Christians across the last 1,600 years have understood 1 Corinthians," especially those from the 4th and 5th century.
That's not to dismiss them, however. I think us Euro-American centric interpreters need the voices from across the ocean and throughout the past, especially the ones closer to the moment and closer to the environment. My caution is that sometimes such a method can bring things to the text that simply weren't there before or intended by the author, but we shall see.
So how does Bailey use his Middle Eastern experience and sources to help give us a sharper, crisper reading of 1 Corinthians? Look at some examples:
His commentary on 1 Cor 1:17-2:2 draws a parallel between this passage on the cross and the suffering servant hymn of Is. 50:5-11. Bailey argues the same rhetorical device of Is. appears in this 1 Cor. passage, which is an important piece of Jewish background to Paul's hymn to the cross as "by building on Isaiah, Paul discusses the cross in a way that could communicate to Jewish readers/listeners on a very deep level. Likewise, Paul was "concerned for his Greek readers/listeners who would not have had the background in the book of Isaiah." Therefore, according to Bailey, Paul takes a page out of Greek hero tradition by formulating this piece after Greek funeral orations: "A careful examination of Pericles' oration and Paul's hymn to Christ crucified reveals seven points of comparison and contrast." These two points illustrate how Bailey situates Paul's letter in Hebrew rhetoric and Middle Eastern culture. (90-95)
In commenting on the guilt induced by receiving the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner found in 1 Cor 11:27, Bailey illumines the strong connotation by bringing into the discussion Middle Eastern versions of the word used over the last thousand years for the Greek enokhos (guilty): "Some read shajab (destroy) or shajib (destroyer). "Guilty against" appears along with "criminal in regard to." Khati'a ila (sin against) is used both in Arabic and in Hebrew. All of these versions recognize that something dark and sinister is taking place." So we can see commentors and words from the Middle East use strong language to talk about the person who is "guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. (322-323)
The famous passage on love in 1 Cor 13 carries an interesting translation of vs. 8: "love never falls." We're used to the translation "love never fails," but Bailey reveals that "Oriental versions have preserved this concrete image and consistently translated the text literally. In the days before dynamite, bulldozers and backhoes, most Mediterranean mountain "roads" were narrow paths. Falling was an ever real possibility. Strabo describes the road from Athens to Corinth by saying 'The road approaches so close to the rocks that in many places it passes along the edge of the precipices, because the mountain situated above them is both lofty and impracticable for roads.' Paul had walked that road. Regardless of danger along 'the mountain pass,' love does not fall. Paul's model was surely the life of Christ. He was the one whose love never "fell down," even when nailed to the cross." Interesting illumination of the cultural background and Middle Eastern translation/interpretation! (379-380)
In 1 Cor 15:25 we read that Jesus "must reign until he has put all his enemies are under his feet." Bailey explains that his "image 'under the feet' the projects the extent of his victory is a powerful Middle Eastern Metaphor." He goes on to explain how a life-size wooden statue of Pharaoh Tutankhamen is on display in the Cairo Museum of Antiquity, and this statue is of the Pharaoh on a throne with his feet elevated on a stool with all of his enemies carefully carved onto its surface with their hands tied behind their backs! And as Bailey goes on to say, "For Paul, all things will be under the feet of Christ. The language carries with it the image of total surrender and the impossibility of the enemies ever contemplating a 'comeback.'" (446-447). That little nugget refracts this passage a bit more sharply in the light of Middle Eastern perspective.
Obviously, in a massive commentary volume like this one on 1 Corinthians (a 560 pages worth!) you can't evaluate everything. And these few examples don't do this commentary justice. I do think they help one understand how Bailey is using his source material and Middle Eastern cultural understanding to illumine the text for us. To be honest I was surprised there wasn't a stronger sense of that perspective woven throughout the text, which could be both a good and bad thing: good in the sense that Bailey isn't controlling the interpretive effort and bad in the sense I'm not sure the commentary does everything he set out to do. The commentary was "Paul through Middle Eastern eyes," or "Mediterranean eyes" as it was title, but as I made my way through the book it didn't seem to be as saturated as I thought it would have been, either in the Hebraic prophetic rhetorical tradition or Middle Easter cultural experience as the author promised.
Now this isn't to say I don't think this is a solid offering, especially a solid supplemental one to the mainstay 1 Corinthian commentaries. It is and I think what it offers is more than made up in my perceived mark-missing. Not only does it bring good sense of the Middle East/Mediterranean world to bear on the interpretive enterprise--and when he does it's solid--the commentary also brings a (perhaps, much) stronger rhetorical analysis to that effort. Bailey brings much detailed rhetoric analysis to Paul's letter, even if it is more innovative and different than the prevailing structural analysis of 1 Cor commentaries of yore. It also provides interesting intertextual links between the Tanak, especially Isaiah, and has a fascinating appendix discussion on the role of the Book of Amos in the opening of the letter.
So by and large a good supplemental commentary that provides a needed service in helping pastors, students, and scholars alike shed a purely Euro-American centric in favor of recapturing a Middle Eastern perspective on one of the most crucial epistles of Paul for our contemporary situation.
Enter Kenneth Bailey's new book "Paul Through Mediterranean Eyes: Cultural Studies in 1 Corinthians."
Bailey joins the likes of Ben Witherington--for which he is eminently known--in examining the socio-rhetorical-culture milieu that Paul's First Letter to the Church at Corinth is mired in. And Bailey seeks to pull the reader's head out of the sand of Euro-American centrism and into the new, fresh air of the Middle East by giving them Middle Eastern eyes. As Bailey states, "in the wider world, Middle Eastern Christians are often forgotten. The current discussions of the emergence of the Christian 'Global South' and its numerical dominance over Christians in Western Europe and North America, overlooks the Middle East entirely. Have already discussed a few topics in the Gospels in the light of important Middle Eastern Christian sources, this volume intends to focus similar attention on 1 Corinthians." (18)
Over the past forty years or so as Bailey has worked through this text, he says "at critical points in the text, I have asked, 'How did Middle Eastern Christians across the centuries understand this text?'" Bailey sets out to answer this question throughout his examination of 1 Corinthians. He has three basic concerns in his approach to 1 Corinthians: 1) Paul, a Middle Eastern Jewish Christian, uses rhetorical styles that were available to him in the writings of the Hebrew prophets; 2) Middle Eastern life and literature is of assistance in recovering and bringing to life Paul's metaphors and parables; and 3) he examines 23 representative samples of the long heritage of Syriac, Arabic, and Hebrew translations of 1 Corinthians. (19)
Bailey begins by arguing that 1 Cor is Paul's most contemporary letter, holding along with an apparent cloud of witnesses throughout the historic Church (including Ambrosiaster, Chrysostom, Bishr ibn al-Sari, and Calvin) that this letter is not simply occasional but written to all the Church. And it's a letter "with a carefully designed inner coherence that exhibits amazing precision in composition and admirable grandeur in overall theological concept" with "five carefully constructed essays, which themselves showcase a discernible theological method." (25)
Here's Bailey's thematic outline:
I. The Cross ad Christian Unity 1:5--4:16
II. Men and Women in the Human Family 4:17--7:40
III. Food Offered to Idols (Christian and Pagan) 8:1--11:1
IV. Men and Women in Worship 11:2--14:40
V. The Resurrection 15
He also argues this outline reveals three principle ideas: the cross and resurrection (I, V); Men and women in the human family and in worship (II, IV); and Christian living among pagans (III).
I find both this outline and these three principle ideas helpful, if not innovative. A glance through my commentaries on 1 Corinthians--Fee, Thiselton, Collins, Ciampa/Rosner, and Witherington--don't share his thematic outline, though Collins comes close who identifies 6 rhetorical "demonstrations." And from what I remember, and in my review of these commentaries in light of this review, I don't recall them drawing out the Hebraic rhetorical style that Bailey centers upon. In fact the most recent addition to the 1 Corinthians commentary library from Ciampa and Rosner state Paul uses Graeco-Roman rhetoric. Except a Hebraic rhetorical style culled from the prophets themselves is what Bailey argues for: "Using his own Jewish literary tradition, he built on the rhetoric of the classical writing prophets and composed a series of masterpieces not the topics he selected." (27)
He also argues that rather than being an occasional letter written specifically to the Church at Corinth, Paul "looked at the specific problems that surfaced in Corinth and selected some of them. The topics he chose were those that new Christian communities were debating in many places. He then composed 1 Cor and sent a copy to Corinth and to churches everywhere. He did address Corinthians and at the same time, he invited the rest of the Church to 'listen in' on his 'phone conversation' hoping to serve the entire church." This is why he argues the book is composed of five carefully constructed essays. (27) This seems to fly in the face of prevailing modern commentaries, which D. G. Dunn states and whom Ciampa and Rosner quote: "1 Corinthians cannot be properly understood unless it is read against the backdrop of its historical context and as part of a dialogue with the Corinthian church itself." I'm sure Bailey would agree with this to some extent, but ultimately would move beyond what appears to be a straightjacket approach to interpreting the letter by doing so in broader, general sense. Here is how he summarizes his argument:
it appears when a long list of problems surfaced in Corinth, Paul selected those of general concern and addressed both the Corinthians and the church at large in a single letter. For this extraordinarily well-constructed, important document Paul reached back into his own Jewish past and co-opted rhetorical styles sanctified by the classical writing prophets...The result was one of Paul's finest efforts and it can indeed by called "Paul's most contemporary epistle." (30)
Again, an interesting methodological position, but also seemingly innovative in comparison to the modern exegetical tradition. That's not to say it's a bad thing. But I think it's a supplemental position, since it does seem to be an unusual one.
Additionally, as mentioned before, Bailey uses his extensive Middle Eastern background--which amounts to 40 years worth living and teaching experience in Egypt, Lebanon, Cyprus, and Jerusalem--and historical commentaries from the Middle East that stretch from the 4th through the 5th centuries to illumine Paul's use of metaphor and parable. As we've come to realize over the past few decades, getting the 1st century backdrop to Paul and his letter-receiving communities is important. Bailey seeks to do so by emphasizing the Middle Eastern nature of that backdrop, which he does in his own unique way. And while this way is a good supplemental way, I wonder how safe that way is considering how informed it is by "how Middle Eastern Christians across the last 1,600 years have understood 1 Corinthians," especially those from the 4th and 5th century.
That's not to dismiss them, however. I think us Euro-American centric interpreters need the voices from across the ocean and throughout the past, especially the ones closer to the moment and closer to the environment. My caution is that sometimes such a method can bring things to the text that simply weren't there before or intended by the author, but we shall see.
So how does Bailey use his Middle Eastern experience and sources to help give us a sharper, crisper reading of 1 Corinthians? Look at some examples:
His commentary on 1 Cor 1:17-2:2 draws a parallel between this passage on the cross and the suffering servant hymn of Is. 50:5-11. Bailey argues the same rhetorical device of Is. appears in this 1 Cor. passage, which is an important piece of Jewish background to Paul's hymn to the cross as "by building on Isaiah, Paul discusses the cross in a way that could communicate to Jewish readers/listeners on a very deep level. Likewise, Paul was "concerned for his Greek readers/listeners who would not have had the background in the book of Isaiah." Therefore, according to Bailey, Paul takes a page out of Greek hero tradition by formulating this piece after Greek funeral orations: "A careful examination of Pericles' oration and Paul's hymn to Christ crucified reveals seven points of comparison and contrast." These two points illustrate how Bailey situates Paul's letter in Hebrew rhetoric and Middle Eastern culture. (90-95)
In commenting on the guilt induced by receiving the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner found in 1 Cor 11:27, Bailey illumines the strong connotation by bringing into the discussion Middle Eastern versions of the word used over the last thousand years for the Greek enokhos (guilty): "Some read shajab (destroy) or shajib (destroyer). "Guilty against" appears along with "criminal in regard to." Khati'a ila (sin against) is used both in Arabic and in Hebrew. All of these versions recognize that something dark and sinister is taking place." So we can see commentors and words from the Middle East use strong language to talk about the person who is "guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. (322-323)
The famous passage on love in 1 Cor 13 carries an interesting translation of vs. 8: "love never falls." We're used to the translation "love never fails," but Bailey reveals that "Oriental versions have preserved this concrete image and consistently translated the text literally. In the days before dynamite, bulldozers and backhoes, most Mediterranean mountain "roads" were narrow paths. Falling was an ever real possibility. Strabo describes the road from Athens to Corinth by saying 'The road approaches so close to the rocks that in many places it passes along the edge of the precipices, because the mountain situated above them is both lofty and impracticable for roads.' Paul had walked that road. Regardless of danger along 'the mountain pass,' love does not fall. Paul's model was surely the life of Christ. He was the one whose love never "fell down," even when nailed to the cross." Interesting illumination of the cultural background and Middle Eastern translation/interpretation! (379-380)
In 1 Cor 15:25 we read that Jesus "must reign until he has put all his enemies are under his feet." Bailey explains that his "image 'under the feet' the projects the extent of his victory is a powerful Middle Eastern Metaphor." He goes on to explain how a life-size wooden statue of Pharaoh Tutankhamen is on display in the Cairo Museum of Antiquity, and this statue is of the Pharaoh on a throne with his feet elevated on a stool with all of his enemies carefully carved onto its surface with their hands tied behind their backs! And as Bailey goes on to say, "For Paul, all things will be under the feet of Christ. The language carries with it the image of total surrender and the impossibility of the enemies ever contemplating a 'comeback.'" (446-447). That little nugget refracts this passage a bit more sharply in the light of Middle Eastern perspective.
Obviously, in a massive commentary volume like this one on 1 Corinthians (a 560 pages worth!) you can't evaluate everything. And these few examples don't do this commentary justice. I do think they help one understand how Bailey is using his source material and Middle Eastern cultural understanding to illumine the text for us. To be honest I was surprised there wasn't a stronger sense of that perspective woven throughout the text, which could be both a good and bad thing: good in the sense that Bailey isn't controlling the interpretive effort and bad in the sense I'm not sure the commentary does everything he set out to do. The commentary was "Paul through Middle Eastern eyes," or "Mediterranean eyes" as it was title, but as I made my way through the book it didn't seem to be as saturated as I thought it would have been, either in the Hebraic prophetic rhetorical tradition or Middle Easter cultural experience as the author promised.
Now this isn't to say I don't think this is a solid offering, especially a solid supplemental one to the mainstay 1 Corinthian commentaries. It is and I think what it offers is more than made up in my perceived mark-missing. Not only does it bring good sense of the Middle East/Mediterranean world to bear on the interpretive enterprise--and when he does it's solid--the commentary also brings a (perhaps, much) stronger rhetorical analysis to that effort. Bailey brings much detailed rhetoric analysis to Paul's letter, even if it is more innovative and different than the prevailing structural analysis of 1 Cor commentaries of yore. It also provides interesting intertextual links between the Tanak, especially Isaiah, and has a fascinating appendix discussion on the role of the Book of Amos in the opening of the letter.
So by and large a good supplemental commentary that provides a needed service in helping pastors, students, and scholars alike shed a purely Euro-American centric in favor of recapturing a Middle Eastern perspective on one of the most crucial epistles of Paul for our contemporary situation.
January 22, 2015
Kenneth E. Bailey brings an extensive knowledge of middle eastern culture to his commentary on 1 Corinthians, most importantly his experience in middle eastern village life. He previously wrote "Jesus through Middle-Eastern Eyes", which I think is a good representative of his passion and area of interest. Here he expands this focus to apply the same sort of “cultural studies” approach to the world from which (he understands) Paul to have penned this letter. Bailey argues that with the East/West discussion much attention has been given to the emergence of Christianity in the global south, but very little attention has been given to the Middle Eastern part of the world from which his passion and experience and knowledge is formed, and from which this text would have been formed.
He argues that this is the earliest of Paul’s material (and thus the most contemporary to Jesus’ life and ministry). From this he attempts to help us see the premise of his own cultural approach, an approach that suggests (and rightly so) that scholarship, clergy and the common reader alike have shared tendencies in assuming this letter and text to carry a sort of muddied and sporadic flavour that moves from topic to topic with a sort of closed interest in the Corinthian Church itself.
The two primary markers of the path that Bailey forges in regards to his cultural studied approach (which are the markers that set him apart from many or most other commentaries on 1 Corinthians) is:
1. The intentional comparisons between the Israelite prophetic writing tradition (of Isaiah and Amos in particular), while at the same time incorporating the Greek funeral oration of Pericles
2. His understanding of the (Scope of the) audience.
To point number one, to understand Paul through Mediterranean eyes the reader must recognize the template of the (book) itself. There is a large degree of difference in the writing style of the ancient Hebrews and some of the assumptions that have been made by modern criticism and translations that have persisted in the West. In the West there exists a stubborn tendency to read in a linear way, and much scholarship suggests that this stubborn tendency persists even when we are faced with a text that does not seem to fit. To this end we end up treating texts as requiring a certain kind of plot formation, and when this fails to arrive in (appropriate) fashion the text is then typecast as in-cohesive. This mentality has been unfortunately incorporated in to the translation of the text itself.
Bailey insists that Paul was writing from his own Jewish heritage and from a strong Middle Eastern Jewish tradition that utilizes what is called a “Ring Composition”. The basic sense of this writing style is that the main point sits in the middle (rather than in the climax) while the outer layers on either side simply mirror the issues at hand. The understanding of the text as sharing the Jewish prophetic tradition lends him to see the book as a highly intentional structure and a cohesive narrative that consists of the following five essays:
1. The Cross ad Christian Unity 1:5--4:16
2. Men and Women in the Human Family 4:17--7:40
3. Food Offered to Idols (Christian and Pagan) 8:1--11:1
4. Men and Women in Worship 11:2--14:40
5. The Resurrection 15
Within these five essays we then find a summary of his primary concerns in the following:
Essays 1 and 5: the cross and resurrection
Essays 2 and 4: Men and women in the human family and in worship
Essay 3: Christian living among pagans
Bailey gives extensive attention at the beginning of each essay (which is identified through a description of the process of "receiving" and "passing on" the tradition) to how this flow operates and how it keeps intact as a functioning unit. And he is highly convincing (I would think so much so that it would be difficult to refute his larger theories, even if some of his interpretations, which he admits as such, do arrive with a bit of necessary mystery and question intact). Thus, as he moves through the text (which he does chapter by chapter, and to a point verse by verse), texts that were once commonly understood in isolation are suddenly given the opportunity to come alive in respect to a larger argument and focus. For example, it is quite shocking to see the difference it makes to take a text that is placed at the end of one section or essay and to see it instead as the introduction to a new one. And yet the beauty of Baiileys approach is even when this shock arises, he allows us the breath to take a step back and marvel at how much sense this fresh perspective actually makes.
The second part of point one above has to do with (as Bailey argues) Paul’s Greek audience (which is addressed in point two). The basic premise of this assertion is that much of Paul’s language and imagery and structure follows a Greek oration. Bailey sees this as highly intentional, and suggests in regards to the 2nd point above that recognizing this has the ability to transform the sheer scope of the audience Paul had in mind.
Point two regards the scope of the audience, and Bailey argues that the letter to the Corinthians was far more than simply a letter to one Church. Paul might use the Corinthians as an example to highlight some particular issues, but what he has in mind is not simply the Jewish readers, but the gentiles of the Greek world and ultimately “all believers” everywhere. The sheer weight of the evidence, when seen in light of the subtle Greek terminology and symbols along with his incredible efforts to speak to his own Jewish tradition (and Jesus transformation) in the careful terms of one who is living with both Jewish and Greek/gentile in mind, is overwhelming to say the least. This is one of the areas that simply makes so much sense, and really does change the way we read so much of the text. Indeed, Paul sets out this concern in the first chapter (from the Church in Corinth to the more generalized company of those “sanctified in Christ”, to the all encompassing “all those who in every place call upon the name of Jesus as Lord”), and continues this scope all the way through.
Some of the insights that stood out for me:
1. The Love Chapter (13, with the supportive chapters 12 and 14 that sit on either side). He contends for the translation “love never falls” (instead of “ends” or “fails”) which transforms the vision of the love text in to a metaphor that we don’t always see in traditional translations. At its core the entire love passage is set within a mountain metaphor. When Paul contends to show us a more “excellent” way, he uses a word to that carries strong inclinations of a “journey” and/or an “extreme journey” that is looking directly up a mountain (of which he carries over in the terminology of chapter 13), and of which we are required not to only run but to also rest, to learn patience and gain experience as we become aware of our surroundings. The imagery brings us up a mountain, and has us looking over the side precariously and down in to the large valleys of our world. It is here that Paul uses a word for love that, as Bailey suggests, “has no footprint in the Greek language”. It is a word that can apply universally, and it is a word that Paul can use and form how he desires (which he deftly uses to create a picture of the economy of God, a new royal law based on a new definition of love). Love becomes the very component in which the issues we encounter in this letter become measurable. In this definition of love we can address the issue of division, both in the Church and outside of it. In this definition of love we can address the pervasive challenge of sexuality and culture. In this definition of love we can address what it means to participate in the economy of God within pagan (Greek/gentile) culture.
2. The subtle (and not so subtle) building bricks of the economy of God: If the core of this economy is Paul’s new and shocking definition of love (which applies to both the weak and the powerful), in chapter 1 we are set directly on a path towards this conversation in the implications of “calling”. There are two building blocks that become immediately necessary in a flow that sends us head over heals in to the question of a community divided:
• That God calls, God decrees, God prepares and God reveals
• That the “mystery” is the cross, the resurrection and the person of Christ.
The first building block leads us to the problematic challenge of jealousy that Paul contends is pervasive across the larger whole of the Church community in dividing what should be a united vision. The second building block addresses the theme of knowledge/wisdom, a central part of the discussion of how division is addressed.
A big part of the challenge that arises for Paul is balancing the nature of his apostolic position, which easily derailed in the eyes of the people in to a competition of “teachers” and “followers” and a unwelcomed heirarchy that stood opposed to the humility of being called and equipped by Christ for the sake of the people. Paul attempts to do the hard work of reconciling this tension, most notably in his willingness to set aside his contentious relationship with Peter. He contends that because we “all are yours (God’s”), and “you are Christ’s” and “Christ is God’s”, that which divides us needs to be necessarily set at the foot of the cross. The term used for Christ in chapter four is one that would have spoken directly to the image of “Shetiyah”, a stone in the midst of the temple rubble that represented the elevated presence of the holy. In this sense he is envoking Jesus as the foundation on which all discussion must b built.
Some other notes:
Bailey gives us some of his more tantalizing and invigorating thoughts when it comes to the chapters regarding women in worship, to his discussions of sexuality, and as well on his focus on Paul’s definition of love as it applies to the rich/poor divide. Set inside the Greek narrative and the Jewish Prophetic model, the discussion of sexuality in particular is shaped with an incredibly intentional focus on the dividing philosophies regarding the body, the flesh and the spirit. Bailey suggests that Paul is not necessarily attacking sexual immorality as a public problem (although it is), nor is he speaking of it as an action done to another. Rather he is addressing it as a part of our “individual personality”. He is objecting the “dehumanizing” of sex and sexuality in the face of a pervasive dualism and a complicated Jewish tradition. As he does with the term “love”, Paul is attempting to speak from both worlds in a fashion that can bring every side of the issue in to the view of Christ (or in to view of Christ).
In this same sense, Paul’s discussion of women in worship is set directly in a wider (and cohesive) unit that is focused on Paul’s somewhat shocking and culture shaping view of personal freedom and rights. Passages that appear in much scholarship as a commentary on women’s place in the Church come in to view as an equalizing process that addresses not just the issue of division that the wisdom/knowledge and powerful/poor/weak discussions that have been pervasive throughout the first portion tend us towards, but also this startling assertion that love MUST reach to both sides in any situation and affect our responses regardless of our situations and where we find ourselves in social systems. The issues of marriage, the conversation of food and idols, the prominence of the surrendering of rights in chapter 9 and the warning of the idolatry of self fueled and self centered thinking all play in to what becomes a discussion of head coverings (activity in the Church and women in the Church), spiritual gifts and church function as a body (and finally the place of spiritual gifts as individual shaping activity with a communal concern in light of Paul’s transformative view on love). To read it in such a unifying fashion is, to say the least, absolutely exciting. It suddenly gives the triumphant return to the Resurrection in the final chapters an incredible piece of context. This is not just about a world that we are yet to inhabit, or an ideal that we are waiting to see achieved. It is about a life that we live now, about a God economy that takes active residence and shapes our day to day living our individual calling, but perhaps much more so our community living.
If Bailey is right, this letter is far from representing a limited engagement. Paul lives with the concern for a wide audience. He also sees an audience in both the present and the future. Paul lives with respect to the Greek/gentile culture, and yet, incredibly so, looks to transform his own Jewish community in a way that echo's the dangerous message of the economy of God without isolating the gentile community. In the process, and under the lens that Kenneth E. Bailey avails us through a study of the much forgotten Middle Eastern Culture (in which the activity of this book would have taken shape), we find a contemporary letter that was absolutely relevant to the person and ministry of Jesus (given its proximity to his earthly ministry), but that also carries over in to the Church and the culture of the ages to come.
He argues that this is the earliest of Paul’s material (and thus the most contemporary to Jesus’ life and ministry). From this he attempts to help us see the premise of his own cultural approach, an approach that suggests (and rightly so) that scholarship, clergy and the common reader alike have shared tendencies in assuming this letter and text to carry a sort of muddied and sporadic flavour that moves from topic to topic with a sort of closed interest in the Corinthian Church itself.
The two primary markers of the path that Bailey forges in regards to his cultural studied approach (which are the markers that set him apart from many or most other commentaries on 1 Corinthians) is:
1. The intentional comparisons between the Israelite prophetic writing tradition (of Isaiah and Amos in particular), while at the same time incorporating the Greek funeral oration of Pericles
2. His understanding of the (Scope of the) audience.
To point number one, to understand Paul through Mediterranean eyes the reader must recognize the template of the (book) itself. There is a large degree of difference in the writing style of the ancient Hebrews and some of the assumptions that have been made by modern criticism and translations that have persisted in the West. In the West there exists a stubborn tendency to read in a linear way, and much scholarship suggests that this stubborn tendency persists even when we are faced with a text that does not seem to fit. To this end we end up treating texts as requiring a certain kind of plot formation, and when this fails to arrive in (appropriate) fashion the text is then typecast as in-cohesive. This mentality has been unfortunately incorporated in to the translation of the text itself.
Bailey insists that Paul was writing from his own Jewish heritage and from a strong Middle Eastern Jewish tradition that utilizes what is called a “Ring Composition”. The basic sense of this writing style is that the main point sits in the middle (rather than in the climax) while the outer layers on either side simply mirror the issues at hand. The understanding of the text as sharing the Jewish prophetic tradition lends him to see the book as a highly intentional structure and a cohesive narrative that consists of the following five essays:
1. The Cross ad Christian Unity 1:5--4:16
2. Men and Women in the Human Family 4:17--7:40
3. Food Offered to Idols (Christian and Pagan) 8:1--11:1
4. Men and Women in Worship 11:2--14:40
5. The Resurrection 15
Within these five essays we then find a summary of his primary concerns in the following:
Essays 1 and 5: the cross and resurrection
Essays 2 and 4: Men and women in the human family and in worship
Essay 3: Christian living among pagans
Bailey gives extensive attention at the beginning of each essay (which is identified through a description of the process of "receiving" and "passing on" the tradition) to how this flow operates and how it keeps intact as a functioning unit. And he is highly convincing (I would think so much so that it would be difficult to refute his larger theories, even if some of his interpretations, which he admits as such, do arrive with a bit of necessary mystery and question intact). Thus, as he moves through the text (which he does chapter by chapter, and to a point verse by verse), texts that were once commonly understood in isolation are suddenly given the opportunity to come alive in respect to a larger argument and focus. For example, it is quite shocking to see the difference it makes to take a text that is placed at the end of one section or essay and to see it instead as the introduction to a new one. And yet the beauty of Baiileys approach is even when this shock arises, he allows us the breath to take a step back and marvel at how much sense this fresh perspective actually makes.
The second part of point one above has to do with (as Bailey argues) Paul’s Greek audience (which is addressed in point two). The basic premise of this assertion is that much of Paul’s language and imagery and structure follows a Greek oration. Bailey sees this as highly intentional, and suggests in regards to the 2nd point above that recognizing this has the ability to transform the sheer scope of the audience Paul had in mind.
Point two regards the scope of the audience, and Bailey argues that the letter to the Corinthians was far more than simply a letter to one Church. Paul might use the Corinthians as an example to highlight some particular issues, but what he has in mind is not simply the Jewish readers, but the gentiles of the Greek world and ultimately “all believers” everywhere. The sheer weight of the evidence, when seen in light of the subtle Greek terminology and symbols along with his incredible efforts to speak to his own Jewish tradition (and Jesus transformation) in the careful terms of one who is living with both Jewish and Greek/gentile in mind, is overwhelming to say the least. This is one of the areas that simply makes so much sense, and really does change the way we read so much of the text. Indeed, Paul sets out this concern in the first chapter (from the Church in Corinth to the more generalized company of those “sanctified in Christ”, to the all encompassing “all those who in every place call upon the name of Jesus as Lord”), and continues this scope all the way through.
Some of the insights that stood out for me:
1. The Love Chapter (13, with the supportive chapters 12 and 14 that sit on either side). He contends for the translation “love never falls” (instead of “ends” or “fails”) which transforms the vision of the love text in to a metaphor that we don’t always see in traditional translations. At its core the entire love passage is set within a mountain metaphor. When Paul contends to show us a more “excellent” way, he uses a word to that carries strong inclinations of a “journey” and/or an “extreme journey” that is looking directly up a mountain (of which he carries over in the terminology of chapter 13), and of which we are required not to only run but to also rest, to learn patience and gain experience as we become aware of our surroundings. The imagery brings us up a mountain, and has us looking over the side precariously and down in to the large valleys of our world. It is here that Paul uses a word for love that, as Bailey suggests, “has no footprint in the Greek language”. It is a word that can apply universally, and it is a word that Paul can use and form how he desires (which he deftly uses to create a picture of the economy of God, a new royal law based on a new definition of love). Love becomes the very component in which the issues we encounter in this letter become measurable. In this definition of love we can address the issue of division, both in the Church and outside of it. In this definition of love we can address the pervasive challenge of sexuality and culture. In this definition of love we can address what it means to participate in the economy of God within pagan (Greek/gentile) culture.
2. The subtle (and not so subtle) building bricks of the economy of God: If the core of this economy is Paul’s new and shocking definition of love (which applies to both the weak and the powerful), in chapter 1 we are set directly on a path towards this conversation in the implications of “calling”. There are two building blocks that become immediately necessary in a flow that sends us head over heals in to the question of a community divided:
• That God calls, God decrees, God prepares and God reveals
• That the “mystery” is the cross, the resurrection and the person of Christ.
The first building block leads us to the problematic challenge of jealousy that Paul contends is pervasive across the larger whole of the Church community in dividing what should be a united vision. The second building block addresses the theme of knowledge/wisdom, a central part of the discussion of how division is addressed.
A big part of the challenge that arises for Paul is balancing the nature of his apostolic position, which easily derailed in the eyes of the people in to a competition of “teachers” and “followers” and a unwelcomed heirarchy that stood opposed to the humility of being called and equipped by Christ for the sake of the people. Paul attempts to do the hard work of reconciling this tension, most notably in his willingness to set aside his contentious relationship with Peter. He contends that because we “all are yours (God’s”), and “you are Christ’s” and “Christ is God’s”, that which divides us needs to be necessarily set at the foot of the cross. The term used for Christ in chapter four is one that would have spoken directly to the image of “Shetiyah”, a stone in the midst of the temple rubble that represented the elevated presence of the holy. In this sense he is envoking Jesus as the foundation on which all discussion must b built.
Some other notes:
Bailey gives us some of his more tantalizing and invigorating thoughts when it comes to the chapters regarding women in worship, to his discussions of sexuality, and as well on his focus on Paul’s definition of love as it applies to the rich/poor divide. Set inside the Greek narrative and the Jewish Prophetic model, the discussion of sexuality in particular is shaped with an incredibly intentional focus on the dividing philosophies regarding the body, the flesh and the spirit. Bailey suggests that Paul is not necessarily attacking sexual immorality as a public problem (although it is), nor is he speaking of it as an action done to another. Rather he is addressing it as a part of our “individual personality”. He is objecting the “dehumanizing” of sex and sexuality in the face of a pervasive dualism and a complicated Jewish tradition. As he does with the term “love”, Paul is attempting to speak from both worlds in a fashion that can bring every side of the issue in to the view of Christ (or in to view of Christ).
In this same sense, Paul’s discussion of women in worship is set directly in a wider (and cohesive) unit that is focused on Paul’s somewhat shocking and culture shaping view of personal freedom and rights. Passages that appear in much scholarship as a commentary on women’s place in the Church come in to view as an equalizing process that addresses not just the issue of division that the wisdom/knowledge and powerful/poor/weak discussions that have been pervasive throughout the first portion tend us towards, but also this startling assertion that love MUST reach to both sides in any situation and affect our responses regardless of our situations and where we find ourselves in social systems. The issues of marriage, the conversation of food and idols, the prominence of the surrendering of rights in chapter 9 and the warning of the idolatry of self fueled and self centered thinking all play in to what becomes a discussion of head coverings (activity in the Church and women in the Church), spiritual gifts and church function as a body (and finally the place of spiritual gifts as individual shaping activity with a communal concern in light of Paul’s transformative view on love). To read it in such a unifying fashion is, to say the least, absolutely exciting. It suddenly gives the triumphant return to the Resurrection in the final chapters an incredible piece of context. This is not just about a world that we are yet to inhabit, or an ideal that we are waiting to see achieved. It is about a life that we live now, about a God economy that takes active residence and shapes our day to day living our individual calling, but perhaps much more so our community living.
If Bailey is right, this letter is far from representing a limited engagement. Paul lives with the concern for a wide audience. He also sees an audience in both the present and the future. Paul lives with respect to the Greek/gentile culture, and yet, incredibly so, looks to transform his own Jewish community in a way that echo's the dangerous message of the economy of God without isolating the gentile community. In the process, and under the lens that Kenneth E. Bailey avails us through a study of the much forgotten Middle Eastern Culture (in which the activity of this book would have taken shape), we find a contemporary letter that was absolutely relevant to the person and ministry of Jesus (given its proximity to his earthly ministry), but that also carries over in to the Church and the culture of the ages to come.
December 26, 2025
3.5 ⭐
Love Kenneth E Bailey’s careful examination of St Paul’s homilies in the first letter to the Corinthians. I’ve done both of his “eyes” books on Audible. I’m going to have to read these properly soon. These types of contribution to New Testament studies need to be put in the hands of not just the interested laity, but to clergy and pastor across the denominations. The rightful and i intelligent dividing of this epistle reveals the expanse a detailed scholarship can provide to texts we’re overly familiar with.
Love Kenneth E Bailey’s careful examination of St Paul’s homilies in the first letter to the Corinthians. I’ve done both of his “eyes” books on Audible. I’m going to have to read these properly soon. These types of contribution to New Testament studies need to be put in the hands of not just the interested laity, but to clergy and pastor across the denominations. The rightful and i intelligent dividing of this epistle reveals the expanse a detailed scholarship can provide to texts we’re overly familiar with.
March 1, 2023
Its a great book, and I learned so much from it. I highly recommend this book for anybody that is wanting to know the cultural background. Also it goes deep into the theology of the early Church, which is great to relearn and remember the Church today.
November 11, 2015
I ordered Paul through Mediterranean Eyes because I needed a commentary on 1 Corinthians and this one had won some important awards. Don't judge a book by its awards, I guess, is the lesson.
The strength of PtME is Bailey's close attention to the text and its rhetorical argumentation. Utilizing a methodology he seems to have developed elsewhere, Bailey highlights the potential parallels or thought echoes running throughout 1 Cor. Particularly, by highlighting some chiastic/ring structures, Bailey succeeds in drawing attention to a shifted emphasis (to the center, not the end) in arguments that have long been interpreted otherwise.
But this strength verges into a flaw at points. Some of the parallels are striking, perhaps undeniable. Others seem forced, a gust of chiasmania.
Also, PtME's historical scholarship is often outdated or out of touch. Bailey warns at the beginning that his scholarly focus is not Pauline literature. He appeals to older commentaries and older historical works. The result is that some of the same old misunderstandings continue to be propagated.
I could say something similar about PtME's theological and pastoral applications. Many These are goodhearted but don't reflect sustained critical reflection on the relationship of what amount to truism and the text. PtME does, thankfully, forward some important reflection on the missiological and cultural impacts of application. That is a worthwhile contribution to the conversation around 1 Cor.
After preaching through 1 Cor for more than 3 months, I'm happy to have had PtME in my library. I'm also happy to be putting it back on the shelf until next time.
The strength of PtME is Bailey's close attention to the text and its rhetorical argumentation. Utilizing a methodology he seems to have developed elsewhere, Bailey highlights the potential parallels or thought echoes running throughout 1 Cor. Particularly, by highlighting some chiastic/ring structures, Bailey succeeds in drawing attention to a shifted emphasis (to the center, not the end) in arguments that have long been interpreted otherwise.
But this strength verges into a flaw at points. Some of the parallels are striking, perhaps undeniable. Others seem forced, a gust of chiasmania.
Also, PtME's historical scholarship is often outdated or out of touch. Bailey warns at the beginning that his scholarly focus is not Pauline literature. He appeals to older commentaries and older historical works. The result is that some of the same old misunderstandings continue to be propagated.
I could say something similar about PtME's theological and pastoral applications. Many These are goodhearted but don't reflect sustained critical reflection on the relationship of what amount to truism and the text. PtME does, thankfully, forward some important reflection on the missiological and cultural impacts of application. That is a worthwhile contribution to the conversation around 1 Cor.
After preaching through 1 Cor for more than 3 months, I'm happy to have had PtME in my library. I'm also happy to be putting it back on the shelf until next time.
March 23, 2017
Excellent for the reader who wants to study life at the time of Christ .
June 24, 2019
If you think your church has problems, consider the church in first century Corinth. Members were split in their allegiance to various leaders. A member was openly involved in an incestuous relationship. People became drunk while celebrating the Lord's Supper.
Paul took on all of these issues in his first letter to the Corinthians (or at least his first letter that survives). He also gave them some of his most powerful and enduring passages: the hymn to the cross (as Kenneth E. Bailey calls it) in 1 Corinthians 1:17-2:2; Chapter 13, the love chapter; and Chapter 15, the argument for the Resurrection.
Bailey gives us a deep dive into 1 Corinthians in "Paul Through Mediterranean Eyes," although he seems to believe his 500 pages are just touching the surface. He bravely walks us through even the passages that are most problematic for much of the 21st century Western world. When's the last time you heard a sermon that included the "women are to keep silent in church" passage from 1 Corinthians 14? OK, for me it was this morning, but that was the first time in a very long time.
However difficult the passage, Bailey tries to help us understand what it really meant in the original language and in the culture of the time. He also helps us understand that Paul was writing in a format that was understood in his time and culture but is unfamiliar to modern Western readers. It's not written in a linear A, then B, then C, then D style, for the most part. Instead, the climax comes in the middle of a section, and the phrases leading up to and away from the climax mirror each other. It's a new way of looking at 1 Corinthians for me, but according to Bailey it's the original way, and the only way in which it can be fully understood.
I was interested in his discussion on the problematic passages but didn't think I had much to learn about the more famous passages. But the discussion on 1 Corinthians 13 was one of my favorite parts of the book. In particular, the phrase "I am banging brass or a clanging cymbal" (v.1) comes to life when the bronze and brass work that took place in Corinth at the time is understood.
And I loved his pointed comment as he opened his discussion on 9:19-27 (food offered to idols):
The question Christians in every age must ask is: How far should we go in identifying with the culture around us? ... As a new Christian community the Corinthians were swimming in a pagan world. "By Jove" as an oath survived in the English language for more than a thousand years after Jove died. A favorite team wins a football game and the people "thank their lucky stars." The language is pure paganism. If these traces of the gods have survived into the modern age, what was it like to live the Christian life surrounded by active self-conscious paganism? To the extent that postmodern secularism has recreated paganism, this problem is also our problem.
Paul took on all of these issues in his first letter to the Corinthians (or at least his first letter that survives). He also gave them some of his most powerful and enduring passages: the hymn to the cross (as Kenneth E. Bailey calls it) in 1 Corinthians 1:17-2:2; Chapter 13, the love chapter; and Chapter 15, the argument for the Resurrection.
Bailey gives us a deep dive into 1 Corinthians in "Paul Through Mediterranean Eyes," although he seems to believe his 500 pages are just touching the surface. He bravely walks us through even the passages that are most problematic for much of the 21st century Western world. When's the last time you heard a sermon that included the "women are to keep silent in church" passage from 1 Corinthians 14? OK, for me it was this morning, but that was the first time in a very long time.
However difficult the passage, Bailey tries to help us understand what it really meant in the original language and in the culture of the time. He also helps us understand that Paul was writing in a format that was understood in his time and culture but is unfamiliar to modern Western readers. It's not written in a linear A, then B, then C, then D style, for the most part. Instead, the climax comes in the middle of a section, and the phrases leading up to and away from the climax mirror each other. It's a new way of looking at 1 Corinthians for me, but according to Bailey it's the original way, and the only way in which it can be fully understood.
I was interested in his discussion on the problematic passages but didn't think I had much to learn about the more famous passages. But the discussion on 1 Corinthians 13 was one of my favorite parts of the book. In particular, the phrase "I am banging brass or a clanging cymbal" (v.1) comes to life when the bronze and brass work that took place in Corinth at the time is understood.
And I loved his pointed comment as he opened his discussion on 9:19-27 (food offered to idols):
The question Christians in every age must ask is: How far should we go in identifying with the culture around us? ... As a new Christian community the Corinthians were swimming in a pagan world. "By Jove" as an oath survived in the English language for more than a thousand years after Jove died. A favorite team wins a football game and the people "thank their lucky stars." The language is pure paganism. If these traces of the gods have survived into the modern age, what was it like to live the Christian life surrounded by active self-conscious paganism? To the extent that postmodern secularism has recreated paganism, this problem is also our problem.
March 6, 2018
Ken Bailey skillfully meshes his knowledge of the New Testament and his knowledge of Middle Eastern Culture---he lived and taught in the region for many years.
I'm a bit of a nerd, so I enjoy the writing style that Bailey employs, but I realize that not everyone will get overly excited about his use of Chiasms. A.
B.
C.
B.
A.
Bottom line: it worked for me; I read and enjoyed the book.
And this book does deliver on the promise of being a cultural study of 1 Corinthians. What was going on in the area at the time Paul wrote this letter explains why the letter had to be written. It's not just about Paul's theology--the book of Romans handles that quite nicely. This letter is written to a church (or to the churches) to address specific issues happening which quite frequently were totally incongruous with the teachings of the Messiah.
Again, not an easy read, but well worth the effort for the serious student of the Pauline Epistles
I'm a bit of a nerd, so I enjoy the writing style that Bailey employs, but I realize that not everyone will get overly excited about his use of Chiasms. A.
B.
C.
B.
A.
Bottom line: it worked for me; I read and enjoyed the book.
And this book does deliver on the promise of being a cultural study of 1 Corinthians. What was going on in the area at the time Paul wrote this letter explains why the letter had to be written. It's not just about Paul's theology--the book of Romans handles that quite nicely. This letter is written to a church (or to the churches) to address specific issues happening which quite frequently were totally incongruous with the teachings of the Messiah.
Again, not an easy read, but well worth the effort for the serious student of the Pauline Epistles
May 12, 2020
I love Ken Bailey's writing. His knowledge of the Middle East is amazing. Having spent the majority of his life living and teaching in the Middle East he has a unique view of the culture and of Biblical themes.
His earlier work on Jesus through Middle Eastern Eyes was so amazing that I have recommended it to lots of my students.
Then I came across this book and picked it up. I have not been disappointed. Bailey gives us a unique glimpse into how those in the Mediterranean region would have responded to Paul and his teaching. It also gives us a good look into why Paul spoke and wrote the way that he did. He was gifted in communicating to the local culture's and took great advantage of that.
This study into 1 Corinthians will give you some insights that you have probably never thought of before.
Enjoy
His earlier work on Jesus through Middle Eastern Eyes was so amazing that I have recommended it to lots of my students.
Then I came across this book and picked it up. I have not been disappointed. Bailey gives us a unique glimpse into how those in the Mediterranean region would have responded to Paul and his teaching. It also gives us a good look into why Paul spoke and wrote the way that he did. He was gifted in communicating to the local culture's and took great advantage of that.
This study into 1 Corinthians will give you some insights that you have probably never thought of before.
Enjoy
February 21, 2023
Very dense and complicated study of 1 Cor. Bailey uses his vast knowledge of Middle East culture and writings to show how each section of Corinthians brings of the section into focus. Greek and Hebrew writers of the 1st century A.D. arranged their sequences in writing differently than we in America.
We tend to start, progress step-by-step to a conclusion at the end. Writers then might put the important part, the conclusion, in the center with supporting info leading to and from that center point. It is slightly disconcerting, but I eventually got into the flow and could follow his logic.
There several really good insights on the scripture noted by Bailey, and were helpful to me. I especially appreciated his analysis of the section on men and women speaking in the church meeting. He made points I had not seen in other commentaries!
We tend to start, progress step-by-step to a conclusion at the end. Writers then might put the important part, the conclusion, in the center with supporting info leading to and from that center point. It is slightly disconcerting, but I eventually got into the flow and could follow his logic.
There several really good insights on the scripture noted by Bailey, and were helpful to me. I especially appreciated his analysis of the section on men and women speaking in the church meeting. He made points I had not seen in other commentaries!
December 22, 2025
For serious study and teaching, this book offers real value. Like many I have fallen in love with the socio-rhetorical view of scripture and appreciate the richness and depth the perspective bring - this work leans more on the rhetorical side and brings insight and Biblical cohesion to Paul’s letter to Corinth.
The tone and structure felt colder and more methodical than I expected, largely because of how much I loved Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes, which felt warmer and more invitational. This just reads more academic than i prefer.
Why not a title as different as the tone and structure instead of seemingly bundling the works. That would have at least set my expectations better… and would have likely meant less sales… lol.
Four stars for depth and insight. Must have for teachers and anyone studying Pauline epistles.
The tone and structure felt colder and more methodical than I expected, largely because of how much I loved Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes, which felt warmer and more invitational. This just reads more academic than i prefer.
Why not a title as different as the tone and structure instead of seemingly bundling the works. That would have at least set my expectations better… and would have likely meant less sales… lol.
Four stars for depth and insight. Must have for teachers and anyone studying Pauline epistles.
February 20, 2021
I read this book in my men's Bible Study and had a very difficult time getting through it. The book is heavily focused on the prose of Paul's letters and conversations relating to prose don't interest me. Significant portion of the book is focused on "homilies" and "two, three or four part cameos." I have tremendous respect for the author Ken Bailey and there is no doubt this is an excellent scholarly work that serves the Christian theological community well. I did really enjoy the author's book "Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes."
Others I know, like Pastor Brandon Haan, loved this book. I can see why, it's just not a book that could hold my interest.
Others I know, like Pastor Brandon Haan, loved this book. I can see why, it's just not a book that could hold my interest.
August 15, 2024
This was overall a helpful book in the study of 1 Corinthians for a preaching series. The cultural and structural insights were valuable, but Bailey’s insistence on Paul’s structure following Isaiah was at first intriguing, but became a little too forced and then distracting from the actual content of Paul’s writing itself. The connection with Amos in the appendix was also interesting, but all these things “proved” was that Paul knew the OT really well and echoed many parts of it in both content and argument style. The first third of this title was truly helpful, especially in setting up an understanding of whole epistle. Can recommend for that point alone.
April 27, 2021
We did this book in our Men’s weekly a bible study. It is a deep dive and I learned from it. However, the repeated discussion on the structure of the prose of Paul gets a little tired after a while.
Ultimately, this was more of a book for a seminarian than a Bible study. There’s a lot of great info here, it’s just the commentary is too sparse compared to the literary breakdown. I was hoping to get more of Baileys life experience in the Middle East as a lens to view Paul. There was a lot of wasted opportunity for context.
Ultimately, this was more of a book for a seminarian than a Bible study. There’s a lot of great info here, it’s just the commentary is too sparse compared to the literary breakdown. I was hoping to get more of Baileys life experience in the Middle East as a lens to view Paul. There was a lot of wasted opportunity for context.
May 9, 2023
Kenneth Bailey is a minister that served in the Middle East for more than 40 years and taught New Testament in theological seminaries and institutes...
In this book, he wrote a commentary on the first epistle of Corinthians using his experience in the middle eastern customs and traditions in addition to his good command of Arabic and Hebrew. He used the old Arabic, Hebrew and Aramaic translations with eastern Christian fathers commentaries to make this volume so his book comes in a mix that combines modernity with authentic Christian tradition.
In this book, he wrote a commentary on the first epistle of Corinthians using his experience in the middle eastern customs and traditions in addition to his good command of Arabic and Hebrew. He used the old Arabic, Hebrew and Aramaic translations with eastern Christian fathers commentaries to make this volume so his book comes in a mix that combines modernity with authentic Christian tradition.
February 17, 2019
Shows that 1 Corinthians, one of my favorite NT books, is a masterpiece carefully constructed and helps followers of Christ survive in a culture that is at best dismissive and at worst destructive. Some insights that are different from what I have read before and will be a source of future study. I have other of Ken Bailey's books and enjoyed this one.
February 19, 2024
This book added so much appreciation for 1) the highly intentional, beautifully inspired, rhetorical style of 1 Corinthians, and 2) the nuances of Mediterranean/Middle Eastern culture at work behind the scenes. I'm so thankful for the years of labor in Syriac, Aramaic, and Arabic that Bailey is willing to compile and share here to improve my (and the larger church's) understanding of Paul.
May 5, 2024
Kenneth Bailey’s, Paul Through Middle-Eastern Eyes, as I expected, was brilliant. After reading several of his other famous works, I’ve been meaning to get to this for some time. It’s a great study through 1 Corinthians, using form-criticism (highlighting Paul’s artistry) and cultural studies (highlighting Paul’s pastoral and relevant approach). Well worth the time!
July 7, 2025
Fantastic. Bailey brings to the table excellent historical context along with personal experience living in the Middle East. His reflections on Paul's ability to contextualize the gospel message for a diverse Gentile and Jewish audience, as well as the passages about women in church life, were especially insightful. I only wish he had written something on 2nd Corinthians too!
December 7, 2025
Get ready to see first Corinthians again from the eyes of one who lived and taught the Bible in the Middle East for forty years. Bailey can analyze he can call on Arabic and Syriac and other sources and he can explain the text with concrete illustrations. If someone is going to teach or preach first Corinthians this is well worth the price. Sell your antiques and buy Bailey.
March 26, 2018
More great cultural context and rhetorical analysis from Kenneth Bailey. If you are familiar with his use of the 'prophetic rhetorical template' as an analytical lens then it can become a bit repetitive, but the substantive commentary is always enlightening.
May 10, 2020
Insightful read over 1Corinthians and Paul’s deeper meanings of his written letter to Corinth. I like how Kenneth Bailey breaks down each line of scripture giving details to culture and culture word meanings throughout the book.
September 7, 2024
Good commentary (more or less) on 1 Corinthians that focuses on rhetorical structure and Bailey's characteristic familiarity with the broader milieu of the biblical world. While I'm not convinced of all of his conclusions, overall, this work is worth consulting.
June 30, 2021
More skimmed though it than read.... super dense stuff
January 19, 2024
Really good and thorough. I listened to this and think I may have enjoyed it more if I had actually read it to see the diagrams and structured writing that he's talking about.
October 23, 2017
Great read and this will be added to my collection. Love the literary analysis and the breaking down of the text with the history and culture of the time.
December 2, 2023
Very in depth explanation of the literary style and culture of Paul. Helps to understand what Paul was trying to communicate in his culture.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 53 reviews