In Conflict over Wisdom, Harm-Jan Inkelaar investigates the presence and function of the OT within 1 Cor1-4. Instead of seeing Paul's argument about wisdom as unrelated to prior Scripture, the author finds Paul reasoning with the Corinthians from the OT. In doing so, Inkelaar effectively counters the notion that Paul's word of the cross is a brand new idea, unrelated to God's old ways of working. Inkelaar rightly declares that Paul is not advancing a completely different salvation-scheme from the past. To arrive at these conclusions about wisdom, Inkelaar uses a literary-historical method. Rather than examining 1 Cor 1-4 religious-historically, sociologically, or rhetorically, the author identifies specific OT texts found within 1 Cor 1-4 and then compares the context of these texts with that of Paul's writing in 1 Cor 1-4. He examines the OT within 1 Cor1-4 intertextually. Inkelaar defines this sometimes ambiguous term as the “process that texts have absorbed parts of other texts” and “the approach that explores this phenomenon” (p. 26). He follows this approach faithfully throughout the rest of his volume, examining relevant passages related to wisdom within 1 Cor 1-4.

Inkelaar rightly highlights the unusually high concentration of words about wisdom within 1 Cor1-4. For example, the word for wisdom, sofia, is present 16 times within 1 Cor1-4. In comparison, it occurs a total of 19 times within Paul and 51 times within the rest of the NT. Other words such as sofos (wise), mōria (foolish), and mōros (fool) also occur in a high frequency in this section in comparison with other sections of the NT (p. 108). Attention within Corinthian scholarship has often focused on party strife, unity, and social conditions within this section. The conclusions about these concepts oftentimes influence the understanding of wisdom. But Inkelaar is correct in his approach to wisdom. He pays attention to the meaning of these words about wisdom and defines them in relationship to OT references that are explicitly or implicitly present within the text of 1 Corinthians.

He isolates thirteen OT texts that inform Paul's writing. These texts come mostly from Isaiah, but he notes that one emerges from Jeremiah, another from the Psalms, and one from Job. He investigates the broader context of each of these texts, sometimes considering ideas several chapters away from the particular text within the OT. He then brings these to bear on the interpretation of the passage within Corinthians.

His conclusions about the role of the OT are on firm footing. In agreement with F. Wilk, he sees the Scripture within 1 Cor1-4 as forming a theological treatise to refute or correct false ideas. He also rightly shows that wisdom is a main issue within the Corinthian church. With the OT as a backdrop, Inkelaar concludes that wisdom is a large problem at Corinth. The problems are not solely religious, sociological, or political ones. The essential conflict is between the “wisdom of the world” and the “word of the cross.”

While Inkelaar has raised the importance of the problem with wisdom, it is uncertain whether he has gone too far with this conclusion. Other scholars have seen different problems at Corinth, such as division, sexual immorality, weak and strong brothers, insubordination, a misconception about eschatology, and spiritual gifts. Conflict over Wisdom has rightly raised the fact that wisdom is a significant problem, but it has not successfully established that the conflict with wisdom is greater than the other difficulties.

A contribution that Conflict over Wisdom makes is drawing attention to the influence of the breadth of the OT context on explicit and implicit references to the OT within Paul's writing. The investigation of the presence and function of Scripture within 1 Corinthians has deserved more attention throughout the years, and this study rightly emphasizes the importance of the OT within Paul's writing.

While Inkelaar's study has much to commend it, he concludes that the conflict over wisdom within 1 Cor1-4 derives from a Hellenistic Jewish misunderstanding of true wisdom. He finds the Jewish synagogue in Corinth to be highly influential and much more influential than what others believe. Because he holds this viewpoint, he thereby retreads James Davis's approach from his book Wisdom and Spirit, which finds the Hellenistic Jewish tradition as the opponent. Inkelaar has not, however, established this conclusion sufficiently.

First, he has not reasoned sufficiently with other viewpoints about wisdom. Others have more convincingly declared that Greco-Roman secularism is the opponent within 1 Corinthians. This is particularly the case from the writings of Duane Litfin in St. Paul's Theology of Proclamation and Bruce Winter in Philo and Paul among the Sophists; they find that the rhetorical words and practice of the sophists led to the wisdom that Paul is confronting. They draw specific attention to division, boasting, demonstration, wisdom, wealth, and power that could all be derived from Greco-Roman thought. Others like Andrew Clarke and Ben Witherington also see substantial overlaps with Greco-Roman secularism that would be manifest in the lives of those living in a Greco-Roman city. While Inkelaar acknowledges their views, he does not interact sufficiently with these other scholars within his volume. While the influence of the synagogue could be greater than considered, the more obvious opponent is Greco-Roman secular values that have infiltrated the church.

Furthermore, he has not interacted sufficiently with scholars who find that much of Hellenistic Jewish wisdom tradition agrees with the OT references that are present within 1 Cor1-4. David Kuck, Brian Rosner, Roy Ciampa, and Drake Williams not only see the OT context but also much of early Jewish literature supporting Paul's line of thinking within 1 Corinthians. While Inkelaar refers to these scholars at places within his work, he has not sufficiently interacted with their conclusions.

Conflict over Wisdom

will be a valuable book for those involved with Corinthian studies. It will also benefit those interested in intertextual studies.

---