^{page 293 note 1} Paulus und Jesus (1905), p. 15Google Scholar; quoted by Jüngel, E., Paulus und Jesus (1964), p. 11Google Scholar; cf. Rigaux, B., S. Paul et ses Lettres (1962), p. 71.Google Scholar

^{page 293 note 2} Paul and Jesus (ET), pp. 41–54, especially pp. 47 f.Google Scholar Cf. also Furnish, Victor Paul, ‘The Jesus-Paul Debate: from Baur to Bultmann’, B.J.R.L. XLVII, no. 2 (03 1965), p. 355.Google Scholar

^{page 293 note 3} The Theology of the Epistles (1919/1948), p. 49.Google Scholar

^{page 293 note 4} The Expositor II (1911), pp. 18 f.Google Scholar; cf. Scott, C. A. A., Christianity according to St Paul (1927/1966), p. 12 n. 1Google Scholar

^{page 294 note 1} Cf. C. A. A. Scott, ibid.; and Allo, E. B., La Seconde Épître aux Corinthiens (2nd ednParis, 1956), Excursus XI, pp. 179 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 294 note 2} ‘Paul's Previous Meeting with Jesus’, Expositor, 8th ser., XXVI (1923), pp. 38–48.Google Scholar

^{page 294 note 3} Op. cit. p. 11.Google Scholar

^{page 294 note 4} Klausner, J., From Jesus to Paul (ET 1942), pp. 312–16.Google Scholar

^{page 294 note 5} van Unnik, W. C., Tarsus or Jerusalem: The City of Paul's Youth (ET, 1962), p. 54.Google Scholar

^{page 294 note 6} Assuming that, while invisible powers are primarily meant, earthly rulers are not necessarily excluded. Cf. Cullmann, O., Christ and Time (ET 1951), p. 37 n. 1, etc.Google Scholar; The Early Church (ET 1956), pp. 135 f.Google Scholar; The Christology of the NT (ET 1959), pp. 227 f.Google Scholar

^{page 295 note 1} Cf. Cranfield, C. E. B., The First Epistle of Peter (1950), p. 27.Google Scholar contrast Best, E., I Peter and the Gospel Tradition, N.T.S. XVI (01 1970), p. 98.Google Scholar

^{page 295 note 2} John, Knox, Chapters in a Life of Paul (1950/1954), p. 123.Google Scholar

^{page 295 note 3} Allo, ibid.

^{page 295 note 4} H.D.B. III, 698b.Google Scholar

^{page 295 note 5} Paul (ET 1953), pp. 54 f.Google Scholar

^{page 295 note 6} Paul (ET 1961), p. 57.Google Scholar

^{page 295 note 7} Op. cit. p. 123.Google Scholar

^{page 295 note 8} Die Bedeutung des geschichtlichen Jesus für die Theologie des Paulus, from Glauben und Verstehen (1932), pp. 188 f.Google Scholar

^{page 295 note 9} Also Theology, I, p. 187Google Scholar, and John, Knox, op. cit.Google Scholar

^{page 295 note 10} Contrast Klausner, , op. cit. p. 435Google Scholar: ‘Paul was not in the lifetime of Jesus his disciple but his enemy’.

^{page 295 note 11} Bousset in Kyrios Christos¹ denied Paul's connections with Gamaliel and Jerusalem; retracted this view in Jesus der Herr and in Kyrios Christos² simply remarked, ‘the relations of Paul with Jerusalem were of the scantiest kind’. For this, and others denying Paul's connections with Gamaliel, see Davies, W. D., Paul and Rabbinic Judaism, p. 2.Google Scholar

^{page 295 note 12} Cf. also Existence and Faith (1946), p. 133Google Scholar: such an interpretation of II Cor. v. 16 is only ‘fantasy’.

^{page 296 note 1} Op. cit. pp. 190–1.Google Scholar

^{page 296 note 2} Op. cit. p. 208.Google Scholar

^{page 296 note 3} Pp. 187_9, 293 f., 302.

^{page 296 note 4} The Word and the World (ET 1931), pp. 87 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 296 note 5} The Scandal of Christianity (1951), pp. 85 f.Google Scholar

^{page 296 note 6} Op. cit. pp. 475 ff., cf. p. 436.Google Scholar

^{page 296 note 7} pp.314 f.

^{page 296 note 8} P. 475.

^{page 297 note 1} Op. cit. pp. 57 and 107 f.Google Scholar

^{page 297 note 2} St Paul and the Church of the Gentiles (1939/1961), p. 181.Google Scholar

^{page 297 note 3} Cf. Martyn, J. Louis, ‘Epistemology at the turn of the ages: 2 Corinthians 5. 16’, in Christian History and Interpretation (ed. by Farmer, W. R., Moule, C. F. D., Niebuhr, R. R., 1967), p. 274.Google Scholar

^{page 298 note 1} This conclusion has been reached by Martyn, J. L. in his examination of the whole context ii. 14–vi. 10Google Scholar, op. cit. p. 274.Google Scholar Cf. Allo, E. B., op. cit. p. 179.Google ScholarBultmann, R., Theology, I, p. 238Google Scholar, agrees to the modification of the verb, but ‘this decision means nothing for the sense of the total context’. In answer to him and Windisch, Georgi, D. (Die Gegner des Paulus im 2 Korintherbrief (1964), p. 291 n. 7)Google Scholar insists on a distinction, and in this is right.

^{page 298 note 2} No distinction like savoir and connattre. The Vulg. uses noscere and cognoscere: Ilaque nos ex hoc neminem novimus secundum carnem: el si cognovimus secu.nd.um carnem Christum, sed mine iam non novimus. Noscere: to become acquainted with; to come to know. Cognoscere: to become thoroughly acquainted with; to learn by inquiry; to understand.

^{page 298 note 3} Cf. however V. Taylor, Mark, ad be. for a note on the distinction between οίδα and γιυώσĸω as to how the understanding arises or is obtained―but this is not relevant here.

^{page 299 note 1} D. Georgi in accordance with his general thesis sees this use by Paul as response to the opponents who used the name first. In other passages, ‘ Immer also weist der einfache Jesusname bei Paulus betont auf den irdischen Jesus’ (p. 283). Yet even there Paul depends on tradition.

^{page 300 note 1} The Expositor's Bible. Second Corinthians (1916), p. 199.Google Scholar

^{page 300 note 2} This of course connects with questions about the composition of this letter.

^{page 300 note 3} Cf. Cerfaux, L., Christ in the Theology of St Paul (ET 1959), p. 176 n. 25.Google Scholar ‘In vv. 14–14 after κριναντας τούτο attention is focused on all Christians. Is this also the case in v. 16, and can we say that the “us” (sic) here refers to Christians rather than to Paul? The whole tone of the passage inclines us to this view’. Cf. Windisch, ‘the whole community’; Lietzmann, ‘all who are fully Christians, the perfect’; see Allo, Excursus XI.

^{page 300 note 4} Allo, ibid.; and commentary ad loc.

^{page 300 note 5} Note Allo's French. Real: ‘si même nous avons connu (autrefois) i. e. quoique nous ayons connu, le Christ selon la chair’. Hypothetical: ‘même si nous avions connu’. For the hypothetical he cites: Meyer-Heinrici, Reitzenstein, Loisy, Mundle and others. For the real: Baur, Holsten, Sabatier, Schmiedel, B. Weiss, Clemen, Bachmann, Plummer, Findlay and Bousset. See Excursus XI. For the hypothetical see also Georgi, , op. cit. pp. 256, 291Google Scholar; Prat, F., quoted by Héring, J., The Second Epistle to the Corinthians (ET 1967), p. 42.Google Scholar Héring himself leaves it open.

^{page 300 note 6} Op. cit. p. 199.Google Scholar

^{page 300 note 7} Cf. Allo, commentary ad loc.

^{page 301 note 1} Plummer, A., Second Epistle to the Corinthians (I.C.C. 1915), p. 177.Google Scholar

^{page 301 note 2} Klausner, J., op. cit. pp. 475 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 301 note 3} Allo, Excursus xi. He cites for the general messianic view: Baur, Holsten, Findlay, Brückner, Schmiedel, Clemen, Weinel, Smith, Toussant, Godet.

^{page 301 note 4} Plummer, ibid.

^{page 301 note 5} Allo, ibid. He cites Cornely, Lemonnyer, Plummer, Bachmann, Belser, Sickenberger, Sales, Callan, Gutjahr, Wendland, etc.

^{page 301 note 6} A thesis (believed unpublished) in Afrikaans, Die Aardse Jesus in die Prediking van Paulus; from the English summary, ‘The Earthly Jesus in the Preaching of Paul’ (1967), p. 13.Google Scholar

^{page 301 note 7} In a paper on ‘Jesus and Paul’, in Bulletin, T. S. F. No. 46 (1966), p. 22.Google Scholar

^{page 301 note 8} Plummer, ibid.Denney, , op. cit. p. 200.Google Scholar

^{page 301 note 9} Allo, Excursus XI cites Baur, Holsten, Sabatier, Straatman, Schnedermann, Klöpper, Valentin Weber. Cf. C. H. Dodd's notable contribution on this theme ‘The Mind of Paul’ in New Testament Studies (1953), p. 67.Google ScholarPubMed

^{page 302 note 1} Op. cit. p. 200.Google Scholar Cf. Jeremias, J., ‘The Key to the Pauline Theology’ in Expository Times, LXXVI (1964), p. 27.Google Scholar Also, Munck, J., Paul and the Salvation of Mankind (ET 1959), chapter 1.Google Scholar In Apostolic History and the Gospel (ed. by Gasque, W. Ward and Martin, Ralph P., 1970)Google Scholar, essays by Thrall, Margaret E., ‘The Origin of Pauline Christology’ (pp. 304–10)Google Scholar; Dupont, J., O.S.B., ‘The Conversion of Paul, and its Influence on his Understanding of Salvation by Faith’ (pp. 176–94)Google Scholar; Ladd, G. E., ‘Revelation and Tradition in Paul’ (pp. 222–30).Google Scholar (Published, and received by the writer, just before proof-reading.)

^{page 302 note 2} Cf. Denney, J., op. cit. p. 200Google Scholar; Dibelius–Kümmel, , op. cit. p. 54Google Scholar; Héring, J., op. cit. pp. 77, 79, 109 f.Google Scholar

^{page 302 note 3} Cf. Cerfaux, L., op. cit. p. 200Google Scholar; Klauser, , op. cit. pp. 436 f., 314.Google Scholar

^{page 302 note 4} Cf.Denney, , op. cit. pp. 201–4Google Scholar; Schoeps, , op. cit. p. 57, cf. pp. 85 f., 168Google Scholar; Klausner, , p. 314.Google Scholar

^{page 302 note 5} Allo, Excursus x1.

^{page 302 note 6} A vast literature bears this out. The work of Resch, A., Der Paulinismus und die Logia Jesu (1904)Google Scholar represents a climax in the method of finding parallels to the teaching of Jesus in Paul. Cf. Furnish, V. P., op. cit. pp. 348, 374.Google Scholar That apart, for the connection with the Urgemeinde, reference can be made to Schweitzer, A., Paul and His Interpreters, e.g. p. 160Google Scholar ‘the middle term, primitive Christianity’; Hunter, A. M., Paul and His Predecessors (1940/1961)Google Scholar; Davies, W. D., Paul and Rabbinic JudaismGoogle Scholar; works by C. H. Dodd, T. W. Manson, C. F. D. Moule, R. Bultmann, O. Cullmann, J. Jeremias, etc.

^{page 302 note 7} Cf. Munck, J., op. cit. p. 186.Google Scholar

^{page 303 note 1} Allo, , commentary ad loc. and Excursus XI.Google Scholar Cf. also Héring, J., op. cit. p. 42.Google Scholar

^{page 303 note 2} Op. cit.

^{page 303 note 3} Paulus der Apostel Jesu Christi (1845), pp. 259–332.Google Scholar

^{page 303 note 4} ‘Die Legitimität des Apostels’, Z.N.T.W. XLI (1942), pp. 33–71.Google Scholar

^{page 303 note 5} Op. cit. pp. 77, 79 f.Google Scholar, 109. He also admits a Gnostic element, cf. p. 72.

^{page 303 note 6} ‘Christianity at Corinth’, B.J.R.L. XLVI, 2 (03 1964), pp. 269–97.Google Scholar

^{page 303 note 7} Freiheitspredigt und Schwarmgeister in Korinth (1908).Google Scholar

^{page 303 note 8} Op. cit.

^{page 303 note 9} Exegetische Probleme des zweiten Korintherbriefes (1947).Google Scholar

^{page 303 note 10} Die Gnosis in Korinth (1956)Google Scholar; ‘Zwei gnostische Glossen im 2 Korintherbrief’, Ev. Th. XVIII (1958), pp. 552 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 303 note 11} Op. cit. Discusses Bultmann, , Käsemann, and Schmithals, , pp. 13–16Google Scholar; his own views summarized, pp. 218, 303.

^{page 303 note 12} Op. cit.

^{page 304 note 1} Op. cit. Excursus xi; cf. Plummer ad loc. who takes it as post-conversion.

^{page 304 note 2} Cf. Héring, E. Käsemann, C. K. Barrett above. Again, one might avoid such polemic by following J. Munck, who accepts the unity of II Cor., x–xiii being added later. He does not accept that those coming from outside were from Jerusalem, or Judaizers, although they were Jews. The Jewish opponents did not present a different Gospel, but shunned suffering out of a love of status. The real opponents were the Corinthians themselves, who were influenced by them. Op. cit. pp. 176, 186.Google Scholar Note, however, the emphasis on status.

^{page 304 note 3} Cf. Bultmann, R., Paul (1930)Google Scholar, essay now available in Existence and Faith (ET 1964), p. 136Google Scholar

^{page 304 note 4} Op. cit. p. 291.Google Scholar

^{page 304 note 5} Quoted by Plummer, ad loc.

^{page 305 note 1} Cf. Martyn's view that the Gnostics at Corinth would not have interpreted Paul's words as a criticism of themselves, regarding them as an accurate expression of Gnostic spirituality. Op. cit.p. 279.Google Scholar

^{page 305 note 2} op. cit. pp. 23 f.Google Scholar

^{page 305 note 3} Pp. 218, 301 f. el al.

^{page 305 note 4} Pp. 192 ff., 258, 282.

^{page 305 note 5} Cf. pp. 296 ff. He does not accept the view that this means ‘unsound mind’, as usually translated, cf. RSV, and upheld by Käsemann, Lietzmann, Plummer, Héring.

^{page 305 note 6} P. 255.

^{page 305 note 7} As Bultmann, , Exegetische Probleme, p. 16Google Scholar; cf. Martyn, , op. cit. P. 283.Google Scholar

^{page 305 note 8} Pp. 255ff., 290 f.

^{page 305 note 9} P.290.

^{page 305 note 10} P.290 and n.2.

^{page 306 note 1} Op. cit. p. 279 n. 2.Google Scholar

^{page 306 note 2} P. 274.

^{page 306 note 3} This is indeed true, but it is doubtful if it is correct to speak so here, when it is the new life and status of the individual, TIS, that is being dealt with.

^{page 306 note 4} P. 274.

^{page 306 note 5} Pp. 280 ff.

^{page 306 note 6} Cf. the normal reading ‘on a man's position’ (RSV); ‘in outward show’ (NEB). Cf. Bultmann's, R. views: Exegetische Probleme, p. 16Google Scholar, ‘nach Vorfindlichkeit’; and the following in Theology, I: ‘a “boasting about the exterior” (έν πρоσώπω. i.e. on the basis of externally visible, impressive merits)’ (p. 222); ‘on appearance’ (p. 234)Google Scholar; ‘boasting over externals’ (p. 301).Google Scholar

^{page 307 note 1} Pp. 284_6.

^{page 307 note 2} Cf. Dahl, N. A., ‘Paul and the Church at Corinth, according to I Cor. i. 10–iv. 21’ in Christian History and Interpretation, P. 314Google Scholar, on the popularity of this line of interpretation of the Corinthian situation with German scholars.

^{page 308 note 1} Pp. 256, 286, 290.

^{page 308 note 2} Pp. 289. Cf. pp. 213 ff.: Mark, i. 23 ff.Google Scholar; ii. 12; iv. 35–41; v; vi. 45–52; vii. 32–7; viii. 22–6; ix. 14–29, etc.

^{page 308 note 3} Cf. Fuller, R. H., The Foundations of NT Christology (1965; 1969 edn pp. 227 f.).Google Scholar ‘Paul's resistance to the idea persisted, and has left traces in the Hellenistic (gentile) modification of the miracle stories, as we find them in Mark. Some of the marginal traits in these stories suggest the Hellenistic wonder worker’. He does not accept Bultmann's contention that the stories were created in that milieu, but would allow that they were modified there.

^{page 308 note 4} Cf. H´ring, J., Commentary, ad loc..Google Scholar; Taylor, V., Mark. p. 237.Google Scholar

^{page 309 note 1} Cf. Barrett, C. K., op. cit. pp. 281 ff.Google Scholar; also Dahl, , op. cit. p. 332.Google Scholar

^{page 309 note 2} Cf. Richardson, A., An Introduction to the Theology of the NT (1958), pp. 39 f.Google Scholar

^{page 309 note 3} P. 285.

^{page 309 note 4} P. 274.

^{page 309 note 5} Cf. the views of Käsemann on this (in work cited), criticized by R. Bultmann, and referred to by Barrett, C. K., op. cit. pp. 289–91.Google Scholar

^{page 309 note 6} Pp. 294 ff.

^{page 310 note 1} Héring, , op. cit.. p. 42.Google Scholar ‘What is more likely is that yet again Paul is defending himself against those who will only admit Jesus’ contemporary disciples as Apostles.’

^{page 310 note 2} ‘Paul includes himself in a group which has “known Christ according to the flesh”, and there is nothing to suggest that this may refer to a hostile knowledge.’ Excursus xi.

^{page 310 note 3} Cf. John, Calvin, Commentary on I Corinthians (tr. Fraser, J. W., 1960), p. 49.Google Scholar

^{page 310 note 4} ‘Vorfindlichkeit’ is difficult to translate; ‘the natural or actual existence of men presented to us’ seems to be the idea. Cf. pp. 305, 306 n. 6.Google Scholar

^{page 311 note 1} Zwei gnostische Glossen, p. 559Google Scholar, quoted and criticized by Georgi, , p. 291.Google Scholar (The gloss was inserted by a Gnostic opponent, who despised the earthly form of Jesus as the temporary dwelling-place of the heavenly redeemer.)

^{page 311 note 2} Cf. Bultmann, R., Theology, I, p. 237.Google Scholar

^{page 311 note 3} Pp. 291, 290 n.2.

^{page 312 note 1} Cf. e.g. pp. 258, 291, 292, 283 f. This is the problem of continuity and identity, and in referring to that he admits that Windisch is so far right (II Cor. p. 138), when he says, ‘“Jesus” is the name used by Paul for the “whole” Christ’ (p. 284 n. 1).

^{page 312 note 2} Christianity according to Paul (ET 1966), p. 44.Google ScholarPubMed

^{page 312 note 3} Hoskyns, and Davey, , The Riddle of the New Testament (1931/1968), p. 160.Google Scholar Cf. also Barclay, W., ‘A Comparison of Paul's Missionary Preaching and Preaching to the Church’, in Apostolic History and the Gospel (1970), pp. 168 ff.Google Scholar (see p. 302 n. 1 above).

^{page 313 note 1} Parallels need not be shown in detail. Cf. iii. 6 with II Cor. v. 16, 17; iii. 3 with v. 17; iii. 10 with v. 16; cf. also iii. 14 f., with II Cor. v. 15; iii. 16 with v.21.

^{page 313 note 2} Accepting this saying; cf. Taylor, V., Mark, p. 446.Google Scholar

^{page 313 note 3} Cf. Dodd, C. H., The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel (1953/1968), p. 303 n. 3Google Scholar; and Historical Tradition in the Fourth Gospel, (1963), p. 359Google Scholar, on John, iii. 3–5Google Scholar and Matt, . xviii. 3Google Scholar: ‘John is building upon earlier tradition’