^{page 204 note 1} As Cheek's, J. L. inconclusive article ‘Paul's mysticism in the light of psychedelic experience’, J.A.A.R. 38 (1970), 381–9 illustrates.Google Scholar

^{page 204 note 2} Cf. Dunn, J. D. G., Jesus and the Spirit (London, 1975), especially pp. 212 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 204 note 3} As opposed to D. Georgi's influential hypothesis in Die Gegner des Paulus im 2. Korintherbrief (Neukirchen–Vluyn, 1964) that the opponents were Hellenistic Jewish Christians from the diaspora mission with a θεīoς ⋯ν⋯ρ christology, the view is to be preferred which sees them as Palestinian Jewish Christians from the Jerusalem church who were willing to adopt syncretistic tactics and impress the Corinthians with their variety of spiritual experiences and rhetorical gifts. This view has been stated most extensively by Käasemann, E., ‘Die Legitimität des Apostels’, Z.N.W. 41 (1942), 33–71Google Scholar, reprinted in Das Paulusbild in der neueren deutschen Forschung, ed. Rengstorf, K. H. (Darmstadt, 1969), pp. 475–521Google Scholar; Oostendorp, D. W., Another Jesus: A Gospel of Jewish-Christian Superiority in II Corinthians (Kampen, 1967)Google Scholar; Barrett, C. K., ‘Paul's opponents in II Corinthians’, N.T.S. 17 (1971), 233–54Google Scholar. The present writer does not however share the interpretation of Käsemann, op. cit. pp. 485 ff. and Barrett, op. cit. pp. 242–4 that ol ὑπερλíαν ⋯;πóτολοι (xi. 5, xii. 11) refer to the Jerusalem apostles. In both passages the most natural way to read the text is as a continuation of Paul's interchange with the Corinthians in regard to his immediate opponents and a reference to the Jerusalem apostles is simply out of place, cf. also Dunn, op. cit. pp. 267, 430 n. 39 and Ellis, E. E., ‘Paul and his opponents’ in Christianity, Judaism and Other Greco-Roman Cults, ed. Neusner, J. (Leiden, 1975), 1, 286 n. 71.Google Scholar

^{page 204 note 4} Bietenhiard, Cf. H., Die himmlische Welt im Urchristentum und Spätjudentum (Tübingen, 1951), p. 165Google Scholar; Benz, E., Paulus als Visionär (Wiesbaden, 1952), p. 110.Google Scholar

^{page 204 note 5} Pace Dunn, op. cit. p. 215, in view of Paul's general stance of weakness in relation to his opponents and his specific claim to be speaking the truth in υ. 6 it is unlikely that ὑπερβολή is an exaggerated claim.

^{page 205 note 1} Cf. also Benz, op. cit. pp. 77–121; Saake, H., ‘Paulus als Ekstatiker’, N.T. 15 (1973), 154, 156, 160Google Scholar; pace Barrett, C. K., The Second Epistle to the Corinthians (London, 1973), p. 308.Google Scholar

^{page 205 note 2} Any distinction drawn between Paul's Damascus road experience and his later visions needs to be expressed carefully. Barrett, however, argues that Paul did not regard the Damascus road experience as a vision because ‘he then saw Jesus our Lord objectively’ (2 Cor., p. 308). It is doubtful whether the apostle would have operated with anything like our objective/subjective distinction in Order to differentiate the Damascus road experience from later ones. To be sure, Paul thought of the seeing Jesus involved in his conversion as distinctive, but the distinctiveness was not a matter of the mode of appearance, which was revelatory and visionary in the case of the conversion as in the experience of the third heaven and which was also just as real for Paul in each instance. Cf. H. Windisch, Der Zweite Korinthcrbrief (1924, reprinted Göttingen, 1970), p. 380; and for a discussion which takes account of the complexities of the issue, see Dunn, op. cit. pp. 97–109.

^{page 206 note 1} Pace Schlatter, A., Paulus, der Bate Jesu (Stuttgart, 1969 ⁴), p. 658.Google Scholar

^{page 206 note 2} Cf. also Windisch, op. cit. p. 377; Hughes, P. E., Commentary on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1962), p. 428 n. 97Google Scholar; Barrett, 2 Cor., p. 307; Dunn, op. cit. p. 414 n. 88.

^{page 206 note 3} Der Apostel Paulus und die sokratische Tradition (Tübingen, 1972).Google Scholar

^{page 206 note 4} Cf. also Judge, E. A., ‘St Paul and classical society’, Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum 15 (1972), 35.Google Scholar

^{page 206 note 5} Betz, op. cit. p. 89.

^{page 206 note 6} Ibid. pp. 15–18, 20–38.

^{page 207 note 1} Ibid. pp. 75–82.

^{page 207 note 2} Cf. Windisch, op. cit. pp. 406 f.; Betz, op. cit. pp. 14 f., 39; Barrett, 2 Cor., p. 328.

^{page 207 note 3} Cf. also Windisch, op. cit. pp. 297 ff., Betz, op. cit. pp. 68 f.

^{page 207 note 4} Fridrichsen, Cf. A., ‘Zum Stil des paulinischen Peristasenkatalogs 2 Kor. 11:23 ff.’, Symbolae Osloenses, fasc. 7 (1928), 25–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 207 note 5} Cf. also Betz, op. cit. pp. 86–9.

^{page 207 note 6} As Käsemann, op. cit. pp. 475–521, so clearly demonstrated.

^{page 208 note 1} Cf. also Barrett, 2 Cor., p. 312.

^{page 208 note 2} Judge, Cf. E. A., ‘The conflict of educational aims in NT thought’, Journal of Christian Education 9 (1966), 45Google Scholar. ‘If it is realized that everyone in antiquity would have known that the finest military award for valour was the corona muralis for the man who was first up the wall in the face of the enemy, Paul's point is devastatingly plain: he was first down.’

^{page 208 note 3} Pace Dunn, op. cit. pp. 214 f., who follows Lindblom, J., Gesichte und Offenbarungen (Lund, 1968), P. 45.Google Scholar

^{page 208 note 4} Pace Barrett, 2 Cor., p. 307.

^{page 208 note 5} Pace Güttgemanns, E., Der leidende Apostel und sein Herr (Göttingen, 1966), pp. 160 f.Google Scholar

^{page 209 note 1} Cf. Windisch, op. cit. pp. 370, 380 on this ‘Bescheidenheitsstil’, Spittler, R., ‘The limits of ecstasy: an exegesis of 2 Corinthians 12: 1–10’ in Current Issues in Biblical and Patristic Interpretation, ed. Hawthorne, G. F. (Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1975), p. 264Google Scholar who speaks of ‘a device Paul uses to mark himself off from the demonstrational, propagandistic uses of ecstasy (and esotericism) utilized by his opponents’ and Betz, op. cit. pp. 70, 91, 95.

^{page 209 note 2} Cf. Betz, op. cit. pp. 89–100.

^{page 209 note 3} Vυ. 7b–10 contain features' of an aretalogy, cf. Betz, op. cit. pp. 92 ff., ‘Eine Christus-Aretalogie bei Paulus’, Z.Th.K. 56 (1969), 288–305.Google Scholar

^{page 209 note 4} Betz, Der Apostel Paulus, pp. 72, 89.

^{page 209 note 5} Cf. also Dunn, op. cit. pp. 214, 413 n. 77.

^{page 210 note 1} Cf. Georgi, op. cit. p. 231; Oostendorp, op. cit. p. 14.

^{page 210 note 2} Cf. Barrett, 2Cor., p. 231.

^{page 210 note 3} Cf. Betz, Der Apostel Paulus, p. 96; Spittler, op. cit. p. 265.

^{page 210 note 4} Cf. also Käsemann, op. cit. pp. 507 f.; Betz, , Der Apostel Paulus, p. 132.Google Scholar

^{page 211 note 1} Plummer, Cf. A., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Second Epistle of St Paul to the Corinthians (Edinburgh, 1915), p. 344Google Scholar; Schlatter, op. cit. p. 663; Betz, Der Apostel Paulus, p. 91; Saake, op. cit. p.154.

^{page 211 note 2} Cf. Hughes, op. cit. p. 433; Schoonhoven, C., The Wrath of Heaven (Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1966), p. 64.Google Scholar

^{page 212 note 1} Cf. Bietenhard, op. cit. pp. 11 f.; Traub, H., ‘οὑρανóς’, TDNT 5, 511 f.Google Scholar

^{page 212 note 2} Calvin, J., The Second Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians and the Epistles to Timothy, Titus and Philemon, trans. T. A. Smail (Edinburgh, 1964), p. 156Google Scholar; cf. also Barrett, 2Cor., p. 310.

^{page 212 note 3} Cf. Plummer, op. cit. p. 343, though this argument cannot be connected in any way with Paul's use of ⋯ς in υ. 2.

^{page 212 note 4} Charles, Cf. R. H., The Book of the Secrets of Enoch (Oxford, 1896), p. xlGoogle Scholar; Bietenhard, op. cit. p. 166; Strugnell, J., ‘The Angelic Liturgy at Qumran’ in Congress Volume (Oxford, 1959)Google Scholar, Supplement to Vetus Teslamentum VII (Leiden, 1961), 329; Simon, U., Heaven in the Christian Tradition (London, 1958), p. 42.Google Scholar

^{page 212 note 5} Cf. Strugnell, op. cit. pp. 318–45.

^{page 213 note 1} Cf. also Strack, H. L. and Billerbeck, P., Kommenlar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Mid-rasch (Munich, 1926), 3, 531 ff.Google Scholar; Bietenhard, op. cit. pp. 3 ff.; Traub, op. cit. pp. 511 f.

^{page 213 note 2} Bietenhard, an advocate of this view, concedes ‘wir können Paulus nicht einfach auf den 2 Hen. reduzieren und daraus erklären. Wir können das im Text des Paulus Fehlende nicht einfach aus dem 2 Hen. ergänzen’ (op. cit. p. 168).

^{page 214 note 1} Jeremias, Cf. J., ‘παρ⋯δεiσος’, TDNT 5, 765–73Google Scholar; Strack-Billerbeck, op. cit. IV, 1130–65; Volz, P., Die Eschatologie der jüdischen Gemeinde (Hildesheim, 1966 ² ), pp. 413 f. for further references to Paradise.Google Scholar

^{page 214 note 2} Cf. also Russell, D. S., The Method and Message of Jewish Apocalyptic (London, 1964), p. 283.Google Scholar

^{page 214 note 3} Cf. Jeremias, op. cit. p. 770.

^{page 214 note 4} Op. cit. p. 167.

^{page 215 note 1} Cf. Oostendorp. op. cit. p. 14; Jewett, R., Paul's Anthropological Terms (Leiden, 1971), p. 278.Google Scholar

^{page 215 note 2} Jewett, op. cit. p. 278.

^{page 216 note 1} Cf. also Spittler, op. cit. pp. 263 f; pace Dunn, op. cit. p. 215, who stresses the ineffability of such mystical and ecstatic experiences.

^{page 216 note 2} Cf. Russell, op. cit. pp. 107–18; also Rev. x. 4.

^{page 216 note 3} Jeremias, Cf. J., Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus (London, 1969), pp. 237–41.Google Scholar

^{page 216 note 4} Cf. also Windisch, op. cit. pp. 377 f.

^{page 216 note 5} Cf. Bousset, W., Die Himmelsreise der Seele (Darmstadt, 1971 ²)Google Scholar (reprint of articles in A.R.W. IV, 1901); Widengren, G., The Ascension of the Apostle and the Heavenly Books (UUA, 1950: 7, Uppsala)Google Scholar; Eliade, M., Shamanism (New York, 1964), pp. 115–44, 181–288, 392ff., 477 ff.Google Scholar; Colpe, C., ‘Die “Himmelsreise der Seele” als philosophic- und religionsgeschichtliches Problem’, in Festschrift für Joseph Klein (Göttingen, 1967), pp. 85–104.Google Scholar

^{page 217 note 1} Cf. Windisch, op. cit. p. 376; Scholem, G., Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism and Talmudic Tradition (New York, 1960), pp. 14–19Google Scholar; Bowker, J. W., ‘“Merkabah” visions and the visions of Paul’, J.S.S. 16 (1971), 157–73.Google Scholar

^{page 217 note 2} Cf. Bowker, op. cit. pp. 163, 167 on this.

^{page 217 note 3} Scholem, op. cit. pp. 17 f.

^{page 217 note 4} For the notion of danger being attached to heavenly journeys, cf. I Enoch Xl. 7; Apoc. Abr. xvii; Asc. Isa. ix. 1, 2; also Maier, J., ‘Das Gefährdungsmotiv bei der Himmelsreise in der jüdischen Apokalyptik und “Gnosis”’, Kairos 5 (1963), 18–40Google Scholar; Bowker, op. cit. p. 157, who explains it in terms of the physical danger of approaching the holy in a state of uncleanness.

^{page 217 note 5} As Windisch, op. cit. p. 377 says, ‘Ein echtes Erlebnis beschreibt er uns; nur ist Form und Inhalt, soweit er darüber Andeutungen macht, durch die üiberlieferten Vorstellungen der Zeit bestimmt.’

^{page 218 note 1} Cf. also Jeremias, ‘παρ⋯δεσος’, p. 772.

^{page 218 note 2} Cf. also Windisch, op. cit. p. 375.

^{page 218 note 3} Hughes, op. cit. p. 422.

^{page 218 note 4} Though it is omitted by ⁴⁶ D K it vg syr Irenaeus Origen, the διó is to be retained as the more difficult reading and the first phrase related to υ. 7 rather than to parts of υ. 6. The δió is redundant but not impossible and anticipates the íνα for emphasis, cf. Heb. xiii. 12.

^{page 219 note 1} Cf. also Käsemann, op. cit. p. 502.

^{page 219 note 2} Cf. also Benz, op. cit. pp. 93 f., III; Dunn, op. cit. pp. 212 ff.; pace Käsemann, op. cit. pp. 513, 515.

^{page 220 note 1} Cf. Dunn, op. cit. p. 330. ‘While they thought of the Spirit as a power of the already which swallows up the not yet in forceful speech and action, Paul thought of it as a power which reinforces the not yet … In his experience the Spirit of Christ had not obliterated the antithesis of power and weakness, he had sharpened it.’ This is however a characterization which overstates the negative in the apostolic perspective. After all, the Spirit for Paul is also a power of the already (cf. v. 5) but one who provides anticipation of the consummation not its fullness, and Paul himself in the power of the Spirit performs signs and wonders and mighty works but έν π⋯ση ὑπoμoν⋯ (xii. 12).