The intended audience
Obviously many members of the church in Corinth were Gentiles. Among the Greeks, prostitution was considered perfectly acceptable behavior, whereas Jews considered it wicked. The fact that the church needed to ask about prostitution shows it had a substantial Greek element.
On the other hand, Paul freely alludes to and argues from the Old Testament as though his readers were familiar with it. That is, he assumes that many of his readers are Jews or God-fearers. In Acts, Luke refers to certain Gentiles as “God fearers,” likely Gentiles associated with the synagogues and worship of Yahweh but who were not circumcised — that is, not proselytes (Acts 10:2; 13:16,26).
As explained by the NET Bible translators,
The description of Cornelius as a devout, God-fearing man probably means that he belonged to the category called “God-fearers,” Gentiles who worshiped the God of Israel and in many cases kept the Mosaic law, but did not take the final step of circumcision necessary to become a proselyte to Judaism. See further K. G. Kuhn, TDNT 6:732–34, 43–44, and Sir[ach] 11:17; Sir 27:11; 39:27.
It’s a phenomenon rarely commented on, because we just naturally assume that a Gentile would have to become a proselyte to worship God, but evidently this was not true west of Jerusalem and Antioch. (Cornelius lived in Caesarea, a predominantly Roman city in Galilee, but may well have become a God fearer in a more western city. He was in Caesarea on assignment for the Emperor.)
Rather, the Jews in that part of the world considered the Septuagint to be their scriptures (just as Americans tend to think of their English translations as the scriptures rather than the original Greek and Hebrew), whereas Judean and Babylonian Jews studied the Old Testament in Hebrew (much easier if your native language is Aramaic, which is similar to Hebrew). The rabbis and Oral Law had little influence in the West, whereas the rabbis were the official interpreters of the Law in Judea and Babylon.
In short, Western Judaism was not like Judean Judaism, which is why Paul’s doctrinal opponents appear to have been from Jerusalem, not the local synagogues. Paul had plenty of trouble with the Jewish synagogues in Asia Minor and Greece, but there was no “circumcision party” ostensibly within the church arguing that Christians must also be proselytes. That argument came from Judea.
Hence, I’m not surprised that Paul encountered Gentile worshipers of God who were not circumcised. The further a Jew got from the Jerusalem, the more he appreciated the faith of the Gentiles and more willing he was to invite him to synagogue despite being uncircumcised. (And antibiotics and the best painkillers had not yet been invented — making adult circumcision a truly daunting option for a Greek.)
Therefore, it seems clear that the congregation was ethnically mixed and that there were many of both Jews and Gentiles.
They lived, of course, in Corinth, a Grecian city on the isthmus that connected the Peloponnesian Peninsula with northern Greece.
This made Corinth an important port city, because they’d recognized the commercial opportunity of helping ships avoid having to navigate the rocky, dangerous southern shores of Greece by 
taking a shortcut across the isthmus.
They’ve now built a canal for this purpose, but in biblical times that pulled boats on dollies over a paved road — which was surely expensive but still better than risking shipwreck without the benefit of GPS or sextants.
Another option was for a ship to unload its cargo, pay for cargo delivery to the other shore, and have another ship take the cargo from there.
As a result, like many port cities, Corinth for famous for showing sailors a good time.
As explained by PBS,
A typical visitor to the ancient city of Corinth would have approached the city along the paved stones of the Lechaion Road. On the right stood the great Temple of Apollo, built in the 6th century BCE; seven of its Doric columns still stand silhouetted against the Aegean sun. Only a few steps from the temple were the sacred springs of the Pierenne, where pilgrims had worshipped for centuries. Towering over the entire metropolis was the Acrocorinth, an immense outcropping that sheltered shrines sacred to the goddesses Aphrodite and Demeter.
Sitting astride an isthmus, Corinth served two harbors: Lechaion to the north and Cenchreae to the East. Along the shipping lanes and through the bustling warehouses passed luxury goods — leather, linen, wine, oils and fine marble — that appealed to the tastes of the city’s wealthy residents. Religious practice followed trade routes. Besides Apollo, Athena, Aphrodite, and Asclepius, the residents of Corinth paid homage to foreign as well as civic deities.
In 146 BC, Rome went to war with Greece in order to annex it, and Corinth resisted — resulting in the utter destruction of the city. The men were killed and the women and children were sold into slavery. Rome was a ruthless conqueror.
In 44 BC, Julius Caesar founded a new Corinth on the site of the old Corinth. The city was was very cosmopolitan. Julius “populated it with conscripted Italian, Greek, Syrian, Egyptian and Judean freed slaves.” That is, Corinth was a Roman colony settled by retired soldiers from across the Empire, given land grants by the Empire at the conclusion of their service.
Indeed, some of the soldiers had won their freedom from slavery through service to the Empire. The result would have been intense allegiance to Rome with very little allegiance to the defeated Grecian city-states.
Because of its location on the land bridge to the Peloponnesian Peninsula, occupied by Sparta and many other Grecian cities, and the overland shortcut for Mediterranean shipping, the citizens quickly profited very well, inducing immigration from across the Empire, including many Jewish business people. Indeed, by the time Paul arrived, Corinth was the largest city in Greece (excluding Grecian cities in Asia, such as Ephesus).
The city developed a reputation for licentiousness. “Indeed, one of the Greek verbs for fornicate was korinthiazomai, a word derived from the city’s name.” On the other hand, prostitution was accepted throughout the non-Jewish Grecian world — even highly favored. But the large number of sailors and other travelers to the city surely produced a robust sex trade.
Unlike the other, much older Grecian cities, Corinth would have had a population relatively unbound to tradition. While the officially sanctioned Roman deities would have been worshiped, perhaps along with the Emperor himself, the colonists and immigrants would have brought their own religions with them from across the Empire.
But just as is true in modern American cities, the urban culture encourages experimentation and the rejection of traditional practices — hence opening minds to Christianity more so than in cities where long-established family ties and connections to the city government, and hence city gods, would stand in the way of conversion.
Paul stayed in Corinth 18 months. While there, he met many Roman Christian Jews because all Jews had been expelled from Rome — many winding up in Corinth. Among these was Priscilla and Aquila. And this is likely why Paul knew so many Christians in Rome when he wrote Romans.
Finally, it’s clear from 1 Corinthians that Paul’s converts were from all strata of Corinthian society — rich and poor, powerful and oppressed, Roman and Jew and Greek. And they met in houses, likely no more than 30 per house, despite being a single ekklesia. Just as was true in Jerusalem, they met literally from house to house, but could not meet together in a synagogue because the Jewish authorities opposed Paul’s work. And they likely could not meet in the Greek amphitheater or other public spaces because this normally required a sacrifice to the pagan gods.
Thus, these were not house churches but a church meeting in several houses at once. They were multisite.
Gentile God Fearers saw circumcision as repugnant. In Gentile society taking baths and athletic competitions were done in the nude. Jews living in these cultures under went a “Reverse Circumcision” in order to be accepted in said activities. See BIBLE REVIEW, August 1992: Pages 52-57. “EPISPASM Circumcision in Reverse” by Robert G. Hall. http://www.cirp.org/library/restoration/hall1/
George,
Quite so. There was a huge practical problem with circumcision for an evangelistic religion! As Peter argued to the Jerusalem Council,
(Act 15:8-11 ESV) 8 “And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us, 9 and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith. 10 Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? 11 But we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will.”
I think the practicalities were part of the discussion. But how is “baptism” consistent with “having cleansed their hearts through faith”? The phrase is, I think, an allusion to Psalm 51:10 —
(Psa 51:10-11 ESV) 10 Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me. 11 Cast me not away from your presence, and take not your Holy Spirit from me.
David’s heart was cleansed by faith, not ritual. More exactly, his faith allowed God to give him the Spirit, allowing him to be in a relationship that brought forgiveness by faith not animal sacrifice.
And David was never baptized. He was circumcised. But he had faith, which was enough.
(Psa 32:1-2 ESV) Blessed is the one whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. 2 Blessed is the man against whom the LORD counts no iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no deceit.
(Psa 32:10 ESV) 10 Many are the sorrows of the wicked, but steadfast love surrounds the one who trusts in the LORD.
Again, David anticipates Christian salvation — which is why this Psalm is quoted by Paul in Rom 4. And David’s faith allowed him to be in grace — and no baptism.
(Rom 4:5-9 ESV) 5 And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, 6 just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works: 7 “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; 8 blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.” 9 Is this blessing then only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? For we say that faith was counted to Abraham as righteousness.
Again: I’m not arguing that the Baptists are therefore right — just that Church of Christ baptismal theology does not deal honestly with the challenges presented by the scriptures, especially the historical, narrative arguments made by Paul from Abraham and David.
(And I think the Sinner’s Prayer is an abuse of the scriptures, failing to appreciate the true meaning of “faith.” “Faith” is much more than inviting Jesus into one’s heart. The Baptists are dead wrong on this one — and beginning to realize it.)
Circumcision has no relation to conversion to Christ or to living for Jesus. Men and women and children of any age can be baptized “into Christ.” If parents have had a male child circumcised, that’s all right. If a Christian male is circumcised, that’s all right. Circumcision has nothing to do with being “in Christ.” Jewish converts of course would have been circumcised. Gentile converts most likely were not circumcised. This had nothing to do with being a Christian. Circumcision was for males. Islamic “circumcision” of females is mutilation any way you look at it.
The comments about churches meeting in houses is helpful. Early Christians were not free in Roman lands so that they could build “church houses.” Yet they felt it good to meet together. Paul was able to rent a place in one city where he could teach and where several could meet together. Most often, it seems that it was in houses of Christians that Christian groups would gather. We read of persecuted Christians in Rome meeting in underground “catacombs.” They couldn’t advertise their meeting place or time except by word of mouth from one Christian to another KNOWN Christian.
Jay points out that King David was justified by faith and not by baptism. How David was justified has nothing to do with how sinners are saved by Jesus today. Baptism was not commanded until after Jesus completed His earthly ministry. No one in palace or slave hut was required to be baptized in the time of King David. Baptism was introduced by John the Baptist and practiced by him and by disciples of Jesus as well. But baptism of converts to the risen Lord was not commanded until after Jesus had risen from the dead. It couldn’t be practiced until Jesus had risen from the dead. Not by king or priest or anyone at all.
The risen Lord commands that converts to HIM are to be baptized. King David lived long before Jesus was born. OF COURSE he wasn’t baptized. But we who live AFTER Jesus commanded that converts be baptized will surely NOT be saved if not baptized. Jesus is Lord. We should obey HIM. HE commands that new converts are to be baptized. Why do some imagine they know better than did Jesus what will please Jesus? Why speak about baptism in the case of one who lived before Jesus had COMMANDED baptism?
Jay,
“Again, David anticipates Christian salvation — which is why this Psalm is quoted by Paul in Rom 4. And David’s faith allowed him to be in grace — and no baptism.”
Amen.
Ray,
“Circumcision has no relation to conversion to Christ or to living for Jesus.”
Amen.
Think in terms of circumcision as symbol. Circumcised organ = seed for birth (shadow, Old Testament & Judaism). Baptism as symbol = birth of the grown seed (reality, New Testament & Christianity). The first (circumcision) focuses on the physical. The second (baptism) focuses on the spiritual.
My first post (above) is to show the reluctance, especially of a Centurion, for becoming circumcised. They would become a laughing stock among other Gentiles. This is why Jews reverted to EPISPASM. I would argue that the Gentile God Fearers, stayed God Fearers and not converts to Judaism, for this reason (circumcision was too much to ask for).
I would also argue that they knew the true purpose of the court of the Gentiles at the temple and knew that was the place that God wanted to be worshipped by them (the “nations”). If the truth was told that this is where Gentiles could worship, then logically circumcision was not need to pray to the God of Israel.
In my opinion, one of the reasons that Jesus went ballistic in the temple market was because these merchants were crowding out the place where Gentiles were allowed to worship God (if the Gentiles have no place to pray, then the Gentiles will not show up/or severely reduce their numbers).
George,
Thanks for the follow up post (12:03). Very helpful, and I agree. Had not thought about the connection of the Gentile court of the Temple with the God fearers, but there is a common logic. I’ll need to think on this some more … but it does make sense.
Ray wrote,
Doesn’t Paul disagree —
Verses 7-8 are from Psalm 32.
“Unlike the other, much older Grecian cities, Corinth would have had a population relatively unbound to tradition”.
But what about the peculiar custom found in 1 Corinthians 11(head coverings) that Paul says no other church practises? Doesn’t this argue somewhat for long-established customs?
The circumcision that matters today is the one of the heart done “without hands”. Colossians 2:11
I can only imagine the incredulous expression of a gentile being told that in order to be included in the “faith” that circumcision would be required. My guess is that the lack of antibiotics and advanced medical care would have been the least of that person’s concern.. just sayin’
Romans 4 is a difficult passage for those that have a sacramental view of baptism… But, it is also a difficult passage for those that want to advance the “sinners prayer” as if that is also a “means” of salvation.. It seems only God knew “when” Abram believed and He justified him at that moment. It’s interesting to me that circumcision and baptism are both “public” displays of faith and yet God seems to have a preference for faith which is something that only He can know.