“The Rock Was Christ”:

1 Cor 10:4b–c as Pauline Challenge

of the Corinthians’ Understanding of Wisdom

Gilha Lee*

I. Introduction

In the Pauline midrash of Israel’s history in the wilderness under the

context of idol worship (1 Cor 10:1–5), Paul speaks of a spiritual rock that
followed the Israelites in the wilderness: a “rock that followed them” (v. 4b).
Not only is it peculiar that the rock is movable, but Paul’s identification of
this rock with Christ is unique: “and the rock was Christ” (v. 4c). What does
it mean that “the rock was Christ” and what is Paul trying to say here by
referring to Christ as an inanimate rock that is believed to have existed dur-
ing the period of the exodus?
This paper reveals that Paul’s statement in 1 Cor 10:4b–c was written to
counter the Corinthians’ understanding of wisdom by modifying the Alexan-
drian tradition, which understood the rock as wisdom, to an understanding of
the rock as Christ. This embedded meaning in the enigmatic phrase of 1 Cor
10:4b–c and Paul’s intention of using it can be uncovered via two research
methodologies: traditio–historical and sociological research. Regarding the
traditio–historical perspective, Paul’s statement of v. 4b–c appears to presuppose
the coalescence of the “well tradition” (v. 4b; cf. LAB 10.7; 11.15; Tg. Onq.
Num. 21:16–20; cf. t. Sukkah 3.11) and the “rock tradition” (v. 4c; cf. Philo,
Leg. 2.86; Wis 11:4), which are traditions in Jewish literature that mention
Israel’s source of water in the wilderness.
Paul’s manipulation of the combined traditions of the Israelite’s source of
water in the wilderness, especially the “rock tradition” originated from Alex-
andria, is also related to the sociological conflict in the church of Corinth.

https://doi.org/10.18708/kjcs.2018.07.109.1.71
* Th.M. student at Emory University

━ 71 ━
72 Korean Journal of Christian Studies Vol. 109

Paul challenges the Corinthians’ understanding of wisdom because some

members of the church of Corinth were devoted to wisdom and believed
themselves to be elevated above others. The wisdom and knowledge held by
these Christians led them to eat food offered to idols (8:4), which destroyed
weak believers in the church (8:11) and provoked grave quarrels and divi-
sions in the church (1 Cor 1:10–17; 3:1–23). Paul’s statement in v. 4c,
therefore, is a calling for those puffed up Christians to put down their false
wisdom and to follow the path of Christ, the personified Wisdom of God
(1:24, 30; 2:6–13) as revealed on the cross (1:18–25), represented as love
of one’s brothers and sisters and surrendering one’s right.

II. Alexandrian Rock/Wisdom Tradition Behind 1 Cor 10:4b–c

Paul, a former Pharisee who was deeply associated with Judaism, was
proficient in Jewish tradition because he was strictly educated at the feet of
Gamaliel (Acts 22:3), a leading authority of the Sanhedrin in the early first
century C.E. (Acts 5:34). Paul’s acquired Jewish knowledge takes on a critical
role in 1 Cor 10:4b, which provides additional explanation to Paul’s earlier
midrash of Ex 17:1–17 and Num 20:1–13 in v. 4a. The fact that the two
Old Testament stories of Israelites receiving water from the rock (Ex 17:1–
17; Num 20:1–13) come from the beginning and the end of the wilderness
wanderings eventually raised a question, “From where did the Israelites
obtain water in between the two incidents of gaining water from the rock?”
This question gave rise to many rabbinic stories of the “rock of Horeb” (Ex
17:6) following the people of Israel through the wanderings in the wilder-
ness.1) Paul is not speaking sheer nonsense in v. 4b but is using ample Jewish
traditions related to this theme to make a critical christological assertion that
will follow afterward: “and the rock was Christ” (v. 4c).
After this enigmatic phrase in v. 4b–c, however, Paul continues his
argument without any further explanation about the “movable rock” or
“Christ being a rock.” Thus, it is rational to assume that, due to the
lack of explanation regarding this phrase, Paul and the church of
Corinth shared some common background knowledge, which are some
of the Jewish traditions regarding the Israelite’s sources of water in the
wilderness, prior to Paul’s sending his letter of 1 Corinthians. Other-
wise, this description of movable rock and Christ being that rock would
have been outrageous to his contemporary readers. But what could the

1) Larry Kreitzer, “1 Corinthians 10:4 and Philo’s Flinty Rock,” CV 35/2 (1993), 110.
 “The Rock Was Christ” 73

pre–shared traditions between Paul and the church of Corinth be?

Paul’s statement, “For they drank from the spiritual rock that followed
them” (v. 4b) shows close resemblance with extrabiblical Jewish literature
dating roughly from the New Testament era to medieval rabbinic
compilations,2) which cannot be coincidental (Philo, Leg. 2.86; LAB 10.7;
11.15; Wis 11:4; t. Sukkah 3.11; Tg. Onq. Num. 21:16–20). These sources
are reproduced below:

Wis 11:4 (250 B.C.E.–150 C.E.)

When they were thirsty, they called upon you,and water was given them
out of flinty rock, and from hard stone a remedy for their thirst

Philo, Leg. 2.86 (70–100 C.E.)

The flinty rock is the wisdom of God, which he marked off as the highest
and foremost of his powers, and from which he quenches the thirst of those
souls that love him

LAB 10.7; 11.15 (1st century C.E.)

Now he led his people out into the wilderness; for forty years he rained
down for them bread from heaven and brought quail to them from the sea
and brought forth a well of water to follow them. (LAB 10.7)

And there [in the desert] he commanded him [Moses] many things and
showed him the tree of life, from which he cut off and took and threw
into Marah, and the water became sweet. And it [the water] followed them
in the wilderness forty years and went up the mountain with them and went
down into the plains. (LAB 11.15)

t. Sukkah 3.11 (around 4th century C.E.)3)

And so the well which was with the Israelites in the wilderness was a
rock, the size of a large round vessel, surging and gurgling upward, as
from the mouth of this little flask, rising with them up onto the mountains,
and going down with them into the valleys. Wherever the Israelites would
encamp, it made camp with them, on a high place, opposite the Tent of
Meeting. The princes of Israel come and surround it with their staffs, and
they sing a song concerning it: spring up, O Well! Sing to it!; [the well

2) Peter Enns, “The ‘Moveable Well’ in 1 Cor 10:4: An Extrabiblical Tradition in an Apostolic
Text,” BBR 6(1996), 23.
3) Jacob Neusner, The Tosefta, vol. 1 (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 2002), 576.
74 Korean Journal of Christian Studies Vol. 109

which the princes dug, which the nobles of the people delved with the
scepter and with their staves] (Num 21:17–18). And they well upward like
a pillar on high, and each one [of the princes] draws water with his staff,
each one for his tribe and each one for his family, as it is said: The well
which the princes dug.

Tg. Onq. Num. 21:16–204) (3rd–5th century C.E.)

16 At that time the well was given to them, that is the well about which the

Lord told Moses, “Gather the people together, and I will give them water.”
17 So Israel offered this praise, “Rise O well, sing to it.” 18 The well which

the princes dug, the leaders of the people dug, the scribes, with their staffs,
and it was given to them, since wilderness <times>. 19 Now since it was
given to them, it went down with them to the valleys, and from the valleys
it went up with them to the high country. 20 From the high country to the
descents of the Moabite fields, at the summit of the height, which looks
out towards Beth Yeshimon.

Various Jewish traditions that mention the source of water for Israelites
in the wilderness can be categorized according to several features. First,
there are some traditions that describe the source of water as a “rock,” while
in other sources, it is described as a “well.” Second, there are some sources
that mention the “mobility” of the rock/well, while some texts do not include
such a reference. These texts can be categorized according to the features
suggested above:

<Table 1>
Immovable Movable
Philo Leg. 2.86 [1 Cor 10:4b]
Rock
Wis 11:4

N/A LAB 10.7; 11.15

Well t. Sukkah 3.11
Tg. Onq. Num. 21:16–20

A clear distinction is derived from this categorization of the traditions.

The Jewish traditions of the “source of water” in the wilderness can be dis-
tinguished into two groups: 1) the “rock tradition” and 2) the “well tradition.”

4) Bernard Grossfeld, The Targum Onqelos to Leviticus and the Targum Onqelos to Numbers, vol.
8, Aramaic Bible (Wilmington: Michael Glazier, 1988), 126.
 “The Rock Was Christ” 75

The feature of the mobility is absent from all of the rock traditions, while on
the other hand, all the well traditions mention the well’s mobility and state
that the well went up the mountain with the Israelites. However, 1 Cor
10:4b does not fit into this categorization. 1 Cor 10:4b seems to belong to
the “rock tradition,” but contains the element of mobility. What does this
differentiation of 1 Cor 10:4b suggest then? The most plausible speculation
could be that two different traditions—the rock tradition and the well tradition—
had already existed in the first century, and Paul not only was aware of both
traditions but was also able to integrate both of them. This is a natural phe-
nomenon often found in the transmitting procedure of traditions.5)
Although v. 4b shows both features for the rock and well traditions, it is
notable that Paul is referring to the source of water in the wilderness as the
“rock,” not the “well.” It is not a coincidence that all these two Jewish rock
traditions (Philo, Leg. 2.86; Wis 11:4) originate from Alexandria, one of the
two main centers of Hellenistic Judaism where wisdom was emphasized (i.e.,
Philo, Wis, cf. Therapeutae). In the Alexandrian rock tradition, the source of
water for the Israelites in the wilderness is attributed to the divine Wisdom,
also known as Sophia: “When they were thirsty, they called upon you [Wisdom],
and water was given them out of flinty rock” (Wis 11:4); “The flinty rock is
the wisdom of God, … which he quenches the thirst of those souls that love
him” (Philo, Leg. 2.86). This tradition existed before Paul’s era (Wis 11:4)6)
and also continued to flourish during Paul’s days in the works of Philo (Philo,
Leg. 2.86), the Alexandrian philosopher and exegete.7) Therefore, not only is

5) Hans Robert Jauss, Toward an Aesthetic of Reception, Theory and History of Literature (Min-
neapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1981), 23. This phenomenon of integration of tradi-
tions is also found in later tradition of Tosefta Sukkah. Tosefta Sukkah seems to harmonize
two different traditions of the moving source of water in the wilderness: “And so the well
which was with the Israelites in the wilderness was a rock” (t. Sukkah 3.11).
6) Also, in Wis 10:17–18; 19:7, both the protective “cloud” and the “rock” that provided water
had become symbols of Sophia. In Wis 10:17–18 (cf. 19:7) Sophia both covers the holy ones
and brings them through the sea, which is strikingly similar to the symbolism Paul cites in 1
Cor 10:1–2. Moreover, similar to the symbols in 1 Cor. 10:3–4 are the spiritualized water
from the rock and the heavenly bread or food of angels in Wis 11:4; 16:20–22; Richard A.
Horsley, 1 Corinthians, Abingdon New Testament Commentaries (Nashville: Abingdon Press,
1998), 135–136.
7) Richard B. Hays, First Corinthians, Interpretation (Louisville: John Knox Press, 1997), 161.
The Alexandrian understanding of the rock as Wisdom is not limited to the story of the Isra-
elites obtaining water from the rock in the wilderness but is also applied to other texts that
mention a rock. For example, on Deut 32:13, Philo writes: “[Moses] uses the word ‘rock’ to
express the solid and indestructible wisdom of God. … In another place he uses a synonym for
76 Korean Journal of Christian Studies Vol. 109

it probable that Paul knew this Alexandrian rock tradition very well, but also
that it was familiar to Paul’s contemporary readers.8) This explains why Paul
does not offer a further explanation after the perplexing statement, “for they
drank from the spiritual rock that followed them” (1 Cor 10:4b).
Paul introduces the combination of rock and well tradition based on the
Alexandrian tradition (v. 4b) for the finalizing declaration of his midrashic
work in 1 Cor 10:1b–4c: “and the rock was Christ” (v. 4c). Up to v. 4b, he
seems to be referring to Jewish traditions of the continual supply of water in
the wilderness for Israelites. However, his real interest is not in the water
itself but in its source, the rock, which he identifies with Christ.9) Thus, the
essential question that should be raised in order to understand Paul’s enigmatic
phrase in v. 4c is not “What are the traditions that Paul adopts in his
midrashic work?” but “Why is Paul using such traditions?”
To provide an answer to this essential question, it is critical to understand
that Paul’s unseen message is implied in the essential phrase, “and the rock
was Christ” (v. 4c). Paul’s embedded message hidden in v. 4c can be discerned
by a simple syllogism:10)

If: the rock is the wisdom of God (Philo)

and: the rock was Christ (Paul)
therefore: Christ is the TRUE wisdom of God

Therefore, the answer to the earlier question, “Why is Paul using com-
bined rock and well tradition based on the Alexandrian tradition?” is that
Paul is trying to challenge the Corinthians’ false understanding of wisdom by
giving the position of Jewish Wisdom to Jesus Christ, revealing what true
wisdom is really supposed to look like. Paul’s christological reinterpretation
of Jewish tradition can be reconstructed with the hidden contents as follows:

his rock and calls it ‘manna.’ Manna is the divine word (lo,gon)” (Philo, Det. 115, 118); E.
Earle Ellis, “Traditions in 1 Corinthians,” NTS 32/4 (October 1986): 171. Philo also under-
stands the rock in Deut 32 and Ps 105 as Sophia; Horsley, 1 Corinthians, 137.
8) Hays, First Corinthians, 161.
9) Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians, revised ed., New International Commentary
on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2014), 495.
10) Kreitzer suggests a similar syllogism but concludes in different conclusion of Paul’s doctrine
of the pre–existence of Christ: the rock is pre–existent wisdom (Philo), Christ is the rock
(Paul), therefore, Christ is pre–existent; Kreitzer, “1 Corinthians 10,” 114. However, consider-
ing the context of 1 Cor 10 and further the whole context of 1 Cor, Paul’s emphasis is not on
the pre–existent feature of Christ, but on the issue of who/what is the real wisdom.
 “The Rock Was Christ” 77

“For they drank from the spiritual rock that followed them, (which some of
you may think is the divine Wisdom. But) the rock, (however,) was (not Wisdom,
but) Christ.” (1 Cor 10:4b–c reconstructed)

Considering that the divine Wisdom tradition was well–known in Paul’s

period and even existed before Paul’s era, Paul might have easily related the
rock metaphorically with Christ, because Christ was already commonly
understood as divine Wisdom (cf. 1 Cor 1:30), which was attributed as a rock
in Jewish tradition.11) The idea that Paul was bearing the Jewish Wisdom
tradition in mind when he acclaimed, “the rock was Christ,” can be supported
by the concept of pre–existence,12) which is one of the most important char-
acteristics of divine Wisdom. Likewise, in 1 Cor 8:6, Jesus is depicted as a
pre–existent figure: “yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are
all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through
whom are all things and through whom we exist.” Consequently, 1 Cor 10:4
can be understood in the light of 1 Cor 8:6.13)
By amending the Alexandrian rock tradition that Corinthians were
already aware of, Paul challenges their understanding of wisdom: “Christ is
the TRUE wisdom of God.” With this reversal, he gives the message in
regard to the sociological conflict in the church of Corinth, to those who
were devoted to gnōsis14) and were puffed up with their wisdom/knowledge15)

11) Hays, First Corinthians, 161; W. D. Davies, Paul and Rabbinic Judaism: Some Rabbinic Ele-
ments in Pauline Theology, 2nd edition (London: SPCK, 1958), 153.
12) Hans Conzelmann, 1 Corinthians A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, Her-
meneia (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975), 166–167.
13) E. Earle Ellis, “Χριστός in 1 Corinthians 10.4, 9,” Martinus C. DeBoer ed., From Jesus to
John: Essays on Jesus and New Testament Christology in Honour of Marinus de Jonge, Journal
for the Study of the New Testament. Supplement Series 84 (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993),
172. Paul using the verb hn\ in v. 4c, which is an imperfect tense, demonstrates that Paul is
not simply using his language for typological identification between the rock and Christ, but
actually believed in the pre–existence of Christ; Robert Hamerton–Kelly, Pre–Existence, Wisdom,
and the Son of Man: A Study of the Idea of Pre–Existence in the New Testament, Monograph
Series 21 (Cambridge: University Press, 1973), 132.
14) Horsley, 1 Corinthians, 134.
15) Although wisdom (sophia) and knowledge (gnōsis) cannot be identified exclusively with
either, the term “knowledge” occurs in 1 Cor, at least in its verb form, simply as a synonym
of wisdom: to know is to have wisdom. E. Earle Ellis, “‘Wisdom’ and ‘Knowledge’ in I Cor-
inthians,” TynBul 25 (1974), 96. In addition, for Hellenistic Jews such as Philo, gnosis is primar-
ily “knowledge of God” as reached by way of Sophia (Philo, Deus 143). Horsley, 1 Corinthians,
118. The apocalyptic seers also combine the prophetic “vision and word of knowledge” and
78 Korean Journal of Christian Studies Vol. 109

and consequently provoked quarrels and divisions in the church of Corinth.

III. Sociological Conflict Behind 1 Cor 10:4b–c:

Sociocultural? Or Socioeconomic?

1 Cor 10:4b–c was addressed as a response to one of the questions

raised in a previous letter from the Corinthians that are introduced by the
characteristic peri. de, phrase (cf. 1 Cor 7:1, 25; 8:1; 12:1; 16:1, 12), par-
ticularly regarding the food sacrificed to idols (8:1). Therefore, 1 Cor 10:4b–c
cannot be isolated from the broader context of 1 Cor 8–10, which is a single
unit about the issue of eating foods offered to idols.16)
In this context lies the conflict between “the strong” and “the weak” in
the church of Corinth. Scholars have been dealing with this dichotomic dis-
tinction between these two groups roughly in two facets: a conflict between
Jewish and Gentile Christians or between the ones of high and low socio-
economic strata. If the conflict was between Jewish and Gentile Christians,
the Gentile Christians who have converted into the new Christian faith might
have wanted to maintain their past custom at the pagan temple. In this case,
the Gentile Christians seem to be the “strong” at first glance because they
are the ones who are related to the meat offered to idols, while Jewish
Christians seem to be the “weak” on the other hand. However, it is quite
difficult to sharply distinguish according to sociocultural dichotomies, postulating
a neatly divided community with culturally homogeneous members in each
group. Instead, there were weak Christians in both Jewish and Gentile
groups: Gentile weak Christians who always used to eat such consecrated
meat but developed a guilty conscience after conversion to Christianity, and
Jewish weak Christians who had always avoided such idol–offered meat and

the “wise discernment” of its meaning within the context of a revelation of final and cosmic
dimension. Ellis, “‘Wisdom’ and ‘Knowledge’ in I Corinthians,” 94.
16) Some scholars distinguishes cultic meals in an official setting (8:10) from meals in private
houses (10:25–30); Gerd Theissen, The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity: Essays on
Corinth (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1982), 121. Others claim that in chapter 8 and in
10:23–11:1 Paul is talking about ordinary meals that are not explicitly part of an idolatrous
cultic activity, whereas in 10:14–22 he is assuming a situation in which sacrificial food is
consumed in a temple as part of a cultic ceremony; O Lamar Cope, “First Corinthians 8–10:
Continuity or Contradiction?,” ATR 11(March 1990), 114. This is why, in their view, Paul
introduces his comments with the admonition “Flee from idolatry!” (10:14); Dale B. Martin,
The Corinthian Body (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995), 182.
 “The Rock Was Christ” 79

now could exercise their unaccustomed freedom from restrictive ritual rules
after their conversion, only with a bad conscience.17) 1 Cor 10:32, “Give no
offense to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God,” implies that there
were weak Christians in both Jewish and Gentile groups. The fact that both
Jews and Gentiles (Greeks) can take offense signifies that both sociocultural
groups can be the “weak” Christians in the church of Corinth.18) In addition,
nowhere in 1 Cor is found an explicit evidence that the “weak” were a
homogeneous group of Jewish Christians. Therefore, the dichotomic socio-
cultural distinction is invalid in understanding the divergence of the Corin-
thian church.
Viewing the reason for the division with the lens of socioeconomic
strata, as Theissen has argued,19) is alluring, but does not perfectly fit in the
context of 1 Cor. The scholars who accept the socioeconomic view provide
evidence that Christians who belonged to a high social stratum in the church
of Corinth (cf. 1:26–29) would have wanted to maintain their participation
in the pagan temple practice because their business and social relationships
would be badly affected if they refused the meat offered to idols.20) In
Greco–Roman cities, feasts were commonly held in the temples, to celebrate
birthdays, weddings, healings attributed to the gods, or other important occa-
sions. The wealthier Corinthians would have been invited to meals in the tem-
ple as an ordinary part of their social life. To eat the sacrificial meat served at
the temple was just a simple social courtesy; to refuse the meal would be an
indignity to the host.21) On the contrary, the poorer classes would not be much
influenced by such a factor.22) However, more people ate meat in the ancient
world than scholars have often assumed.23) Poorer people would have eaten
less meat, but that does not mean that they entirely excluded meat from their
diet. 1 Cor 8–10 itself tells us that there were at least three ways that people

17) Theissen, The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity, 124.

18) Ibid., 123.
19) Wayne A. Meeks, The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul (New
Haven: Yale University Press, 1983), 98; Hays, First Corinthians, 136.
20) Meeks, The First Urban Christians, 98.
21) Hays, First Corinthians, 137.
22) Meeks, The First Urban Christians, 98.
23) Meat is used as a suitable indicator of intermediate prosperity which signifies that it was
widely consumed by different socio–economical strata. Willem M. Jongman, “The Early
Roman Empire: Consumption,” Walter Scheidel, Ian Morris, and Richard P. Saller ed., The
Cambridge Economic History of the Greco–Roman World (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2007), 613.
80 Korean Journal of Christian Studies Vol. 109

could eat meat in antiquity: at the temple (8:1–7; 10:14–22), in the meat market
(10:25), and at someone’s home (10:27). If people of the lower socioeconomic
stratum also were exposed in various ways to the meat offered to idols, it is
hard to dichotomize the groups socioeconomically.

IV. The Extension of the Wisdom Tradition to Christ in the

Sociological Background of the Corinthian Church

Therefore, rather than trying to define the characteristic of dichotomic

social groups, I suggest understanding Paul’s extension of Jewish Wisdom
tradition to Christ is the key to understanding the divisions in the Corinthian
church. Those who were devoted to gnōsis in the church of Corinth—ones
who saw themselves as “the strong” (or perhaps “wise”) with regard to this
issue—probably picked up on the Hellenistic wisdom perspective and appro-
priated it in their own way. This is where the problem lies in regard to the
understanding of wisdom in the Corinthian community because Paul relied
upon a wisdom derived from the Spirit and moreover the wisdom demon-
strated in Jesus’ crucifixion, not the Hellenistic dimension of wisdom.24)
Philo could be a strong candidate for this Alexandrian influence on Cor-
inthians in Paul’s era. However, it is hard to assure his direct influence on
Paul. It is more plausible to say that Paul was influenced by the Hellenistic
Jewish tradition that sees the rock as the personified divine Wisdom. This
link between Paul and the Alexandrian rock tradition, however, might have
been Apollos,25) although there is only a little piece of evidence that helps
us to speculate. According to the witness of Luke, “Apollos was a Jew, a
native of Alexandria. He was an eloquent man, well–versed in the scriptures”
(Acts 18:24). Since Apollos and Philo both came from the same city and
were contemporaries, it is reasonable that Apollos knew Philo’s thinking and
writings. It can be further conjectured that Apollos’ understanding of Scriptures
could have been influenced by Philo’s philosophy and teachings. The group
of people who claimed, “I belong to Apollos” (1 Cor 3:4) could have been
the ones who were impressed by Apollo’s rhetoric as well as his philosophical
wisdom in explaining the Scripture.26) For these Corinthians dedicated to

24) P. J. Hartin, Apollos: Paul’s Partner or Rival? (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 2009), 63.
25) Richard A. Horsley, “Wisdom of Word and Words of Wisdom in Corinth,” CBQ 39/2 (April
1977), 231; Corin Mihaila, The Paul–Apollos Relationship and Paul’s Stance toward Greco–
Roman Rhetoric: An Exegetical and Socio–Historical Study of 1 Corinthians 1–4 (London: T
& T Clark, 2009), 77.
 “The Rock Was Christ” 81

wisdom, Apollos’ “eloquent speech” would have attracted their interest.27)

Apollos would never intend to cause divisions within the church of Corinth,
nor was he an opponent of Paul: “I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave
the growth” (3:6); “For we are God’s servants, working together” (3:9);
“whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas … all belong to you, and you belong to
Christ, and Christ belongs to God. Think of us in this way, as servants of
Christ and stewards of God’s mysteries” (3:22–4:1). Nonetheless, the inad-
vertent repercussion of his eloquent wisdom–based preaching and teaching
did result in divisions in the church Paul had established.28)
Those who were impressed by the Alexandrian Wisdom tradition were
“the strong” in the church of Corinth. Both from direct mentions in Paul and
from the mirror reading of his other statements, it is noticeable that they
believed themselves to speak wisdom (2:6, 13), to be wise (3:18; 6:5), and
to possess knowledge (8:10). Their distorted knowledge (8:1, 7, 10, 11; cf.
13:8) and false wisdom (1:17, 19, 20, 22; 2:1, 4, 5, 6, 13; 3:19) that is
contrasted to the wisdom of God (1:21, 24, 30; 2:7) were only the cause of
factions in the body of Christ. They were puffed up for their wisdom/knowledge
(4:6, 18, 19; 5:2; 8:1; 13:4) and believed themselves to be elevated above
others in the church.
The puffed up status of “the strong” was the agent for the trouble caused
by the issue of eating food offered to idols in 1 Cor 8–10. Because “the
strong” had the knowledge (gnōsis) that “no idol in the world really exists”
(8:4); “there is no God but one” (8:4); and “food will not bring us to God”
(8:8), they had no repulsion against idolatry. Therefore, eating food offered
to idols was not a problem for them. On the contrary, the eating of meat
offered to idols was “a stumbling block to the weak” (8:9) because eating
certain food was strongly associated with participating in the cult of pagan
gods.29) Because they had a weak conscience (8:10–11), they were harmed
by those who held special knowledge and so participated in idol worship.
To the strong people, Paul therefore claims, “the rock was Christ!”
(10:4c) which, in its implied meaning, signifies Christ is the true wisdom of
God. Paul challenges the Corinthian understanding of wisdom: it is not a
true wisdom/knowledge if it makes you puffed up, unlike the love that
builds up (8:1). Therefore, Paul later manifests the quality of love regarding
the essential problem of wisdom/knowledge in Corinthian church: “And if I ….

26) Hartin, Apollos, 83.

27) Ibid., 54.
28) Ibid., 63.
29) Meeks, The First Urban Christians, 98.
82 Korean Journal of Christian Studies Vol. 109

understand all mysteries and all knowledge, … but do not have love, I am
nothing” (13:2). Christ, the rock, is the one “who was crucified and became
a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles” (1:23). However, the
truth is that he is the true power of God and the true wisdom of God” (1:24;
2:6–13). Therefore, 1 Cor 10:4b–c is a calling for those puffed up Christians
in the church of Corinth to put down their wisdom/knowledge and to follow
the path of the crucified Christ in the ways of love.

V. Conclusion

“The primacy of love” is one of the major theological themes in 1

Cor.30) Responding to the Corinthians’ distorted knowledge and wisdom, Paul
declares that love must rule over all other values and virtues (8:1–13; cf.
12:31b–13:13; 16:14).31) This love is best manifested on the cross of Jesus,
which is another major theological theme in 1 Cor. Through the cross, power
and status transform. Throughout the letter, Paul repeatedly argues that the
gospel overturns the world’s normal status, including its notions of power
and social standing.32) This has crucial implications for the social structure of
the community of Christ’s people. As the body of Christ, they are linked
together in a network of mutual love and concern.33) Therefore, the final
goal of Paul’s rhetoric in 1 Cor 10:4c is the unity of the body of Christ.34) It
can be only achieved through the true wisdom of God, the rock, the Christ.

Key Words
1 Cor 10, the rock, wisdom, the divisions in the Corinthian church,
cross, love (고전 10장, 반석, 지혜, 고린도교회의 분열, 십자가, 사랑)

Date submitted: May 1, 2018, date accepted: June 2, 2018,

date confirmed: June 20, 2018

30) Hays, First Corinthians, 9–11.

31) Ibid., 10–11.
32) Dale B. Martin, Slavery as Salvation: The Metaphor of Slavery in Pauline Christianity (New
Haven: Yale University Press, 1990), 141.
33) Hays, First Corinthians, 10–11.
34) Martin, Slavery as Salvation, 142.
 “The Rock Was Christ” 83

Bibliography

Conzelmann, Hans. 1 Corinthians A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Cor-

inthians. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1975.
Cope, O Lamar. “First Corinthians 8–10: Continuity or Contradiction?” ATR 11
(March 1990), 114–123.
Davies, W. D. Paul and Rabbinic Judaism: Some Rabbinic Elements in Pauline
Theology. 2nd edition. London: SPCK, 1958.
Ellis, E. Earle. “Traditions in 1 Corinthians.” NTS 32/4 (October 1986), 481–502.
. “‘Wisdom’ and ‘Knowledge’ in I Corinthians.” TynBul 25(1974), 82–98.
. “Χριστός in 1 Corinthians 10.4, 9.” Martinus C. DeBoer ed. From
Jesus to John: Essays on Jesus and New Testament Christology in Honour
of Marinus de Jonge. Journal for the Study of the New Testament. Sup-
plement Series 84. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993, 168–173.
Enns, Peter. “The ‘Moveable Well’ in 1 Cor 10:4: An Extrabiblical Tradition in
an Apostolic Text.” BBR 6(1996), 23–38.
Fee, Gordon D. The First Epistle to the Corinthians. Revised ed. New Interna-
tional Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: William B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2014.
Grossfeld, Bernard. The Targum Onqelos to Leviticus and the Targum Onqelos to
Numbers, vol. 8. Aramaic Bible. Wilmington: Michael Glazier, 1988.
Hamerton–Kelly, Robert. Pre–Existence, Wisdom, and the Son of Man: A Study of
the Idea of Pre–Existence in the New Testament. Monograph Series 21.
Cambridge: University Press, 1973.
Hartin, P. J. Apollos: Paul’s Partner or Rival? Collegeville: Liturgical Press,
2009.
Hays, Richard B. First Corinthians. Interpretation. Louisville: John Knox Press,
1997.
Horsley, Richard A. 1 Corinthians. Abingdon New Testament Commentaries.
Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1998.
. “Wisdom of Word and Words of Wisdom in Corinth.” CBQ 39/2 (April
1977), 224–239.
Jauss, Hans Robert. Toward an Aesthetic of Reception. Theory and History of Litera-
ture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1981.
Jongman, Willem M. “The Early Roman Empire: Consumption.” Walter Scheidel,
Ian Morris, and Richard P. Saller ed. The Cambridge Economic History
of the Greco–Roman World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
2007, 592–618.
84 Korean Journal of Christian Studies Vol. 109

Kreitzer, Larry. “1 Corinthians 10:4 and Philo’s Flinty Rock.” CV 35/2 (1993),
109–126.
Martin, Dale B. Slavery as Salvation: The Metaphor of Slavery in Pauline Christi-
anity. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990.
. The Corinthian Body. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995.
Meeks, Wayne A. The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle
Paul. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983.
Mihaila, Corin. The Paul–Apollos Relationship and Paul’s Stance toward Greco–
Roman Rhetoric: An Exegetical and Socio–Historical Study of 1 Corinthians
1–4. London: T & T Clark, 2009.
Neusner, Jacob. The Tosefta, vol. 1. Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 2002.
Theissen, Gerd. The Social Setting of Pauline Christianity: Essays on Corinth.
Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1982.
 “The Rock Was Christ” 85

Abstract

This paper argues 1 Cor 10:4b–c was written to counter the Corinthians’
understanding of wisdom by modifying the Alexandrian rock tradition (Philo,
Leg. 2.86; Wis 11:4) that understood the rock as Wisdom to an understand-
ing of the rock as Christ. Realizing Paul’s modification of the Alexandrian
tradition uncovers the implied message in v. 4b–c. It is a calling for the
puffed–up Christians in the church of Corinth to put down their false wis-
dom, which provoked grave quarrels and divisions in the church and follow
the path of Christ, the personified Wisdom of God (1:24, 30) as revealed on
the cross (1:18–25), represented as the love of one’s brothers and sisters and
surrendering one’s right.
86 Korean Journal of Christian Studies Vol. 109

한글초록

본 논문은 고린도전서 10:4b–c가 반석을 지혜로 이해했던 기존의 알렉

산드리아 반석전승(Philo, Leg. 2.86; Wis 11:4)을 수정하여 반석을 그리스도
로 이해함으로써, 고린도교회가 가지고 있었던 지혜 이해를 반박하기 위해
쓰였음을 밝히는 연구이다. 바울이 알렉산드리아 전승을 수정하였다는 것
을 인지하는 것은 다소 의아한 본문인 4b–c절에 함축된 메시지를 발견하는
단초가 된다. 그것은 바로 고린도교회 안에 분쟁과 분파를 야기한 교만한
그리스도인들이 그들의 잘못된 지혜를 내려놓고, 인격화된 하나님의 지혜이
신(1:24, 30) 그리스도의 길을 따르라는 바울의 메시지이다. 그 길은 십자가
위에서 우리에게 계시된 바와 같이(1:18–25), 형제와 자매를 사랑하고 자신
의 권리를 기꺼이 포기하는 길이다.