1 Cor 13:1-3
Hyperbole or hypothesis
A. Hyperbole
Whenever we deem a particular statement to be a unit of hyperbole, we immediately are compelled to recognize that the particular literary unit has both a primary and a secondary application. This means that the primary meaning is logically what it is, where we have to surmise that the author or speaker wants us to read something else into the statement. If we deem any literary unit to be hyperbole or that it contains hyperbole, then the onus is on us to demonstrate that the first meaning was not what the author intended.
To deem any literary unit as being based on hyperbole we must be convinced that what the author has stated is something that either cannot be achieved or that it is so unlikely to occur that logic and reason would dictate that the author is employing hyperbole.
B. Hypothesis (what is hypothetical)
1 Corinthians: A Shorter Exegetical & Pastoral Commentary, Anthony C. Thiselton (2000) p.218
If I were to speak in human or in angelic tongues (v. 1) is an indefinite hypothesis. The NIV and NRSV miss this by treating it as an open or contingent hypothesis, “if I speak . . . ,” just as AV/KJV and NJB miss this with “though I speak.” Paul paints a hypothetical scenario without praise or blame: suppose it were the case that I spoke with... angelic tongues but had not love, I would have become — like what? Paul uses for his analogy a piece of bronze that was constructed not to produce a musical note with a definite tone and pitch but only to amplify sound or noise. Without love I would merely be an ancient megaphone, an acoustic resonator or a resonating, reverberating acoustic jar. The Greek word involved (echon) denotes not a pitched note, but what transmits sound, usually through resonating. Coupled with the Greek alalazon, it denotes endlessly reverberating noise that produces no melody. (See Harris, “‘Sounding Brass’”; and Klein, “Noisy Gong or Acoustic Vase?”)
The trouble with referring to 1 Cor 13:1-3 as being a unit of hyperbole is that Paul has already informed his audience that certain things within this three verse passage have become a key part of his walk in Christ which Garland describes in his commentary on First Corinthians;
1 Corinthians, David E. Garland (2003) p.610 [bold emphasis added]
The mysteries of God have been revealed to Paul (2:1, 9-10; 15:51), and he regards himself as a "steward of God’s mysteries” (4:1). He claims (along with them) to know the mind of Christ (2:16) and to have knowledge (8:1), and he imparts his knowledge to them throughout the letter. Paul has faith and has performed miracles (2 Cor. 12:12; Rom. 15:19). He voluntarily gave up his rights as an apostle to receive support so that he could carry out his ministry more effectively (1 Cor. 9:1-23). The hardship catalogs (4:11-12; 2 Cor. 4:7-12; 6:3-10; 11:7-11) reveal the toll that this service has taken on him.
Of the eight following points within 13:1-3, as they have become a key part of his walk both with Christ and in the Spirit; how can the following 8 points which amount to being “marks of an Apostle-of-Christ” be deemed to be hyperbole? Anyone who knows anything about the life of Paul would fully realise that the following points are far from being a work of hyperbole but where they are reside fully within the very core of Paul’s person.
1 Cor 13:1-3
- Tongues of men - Latin, Greek, Aramaic & Hebrew
- Tongues of angels – Paul regularly prayed to the Father through the Holy Spirit (14:15)
- Prophecy – Paul regularly prophesied
- Knows all mysteries – He knew all ‘knowable’ and ‘revealed’ mysteries (1Cor 4:1)
- Has all knowledge – He knew all ‘knowable’ and ‘revealed’ knowledge (2Cor 12:12)
- All faith, so as to remove mountains – For this proverbial expression, see Thiselton below
- Gives all his possessions to the poor – Paul was often destitute (1Cor 4:11-12)
- Surrendered his body to be burned (or maybe to boast) – Paul knew that he would one day have to give his life for Christ
Anthony C. Thiselton has addresses how the
'to remove mountains of verse 2 is not hyperbole but in fact a proverbial saying.
First Corinthians, Anthony C. Thiselton (2000) p.1041
To remove mountains is an echo of a tradition that appears in Mark 11:23-24 and Matt 17:20 (cf. Matt. 21:21) as a saying of Jesus. In her commentary on Mark, Morna D. Hooker comments, “Moving a mountain appears to have been a proverbial saying for doing difficult tasks.” Similarly, R. T. France describes the Matthew saying as “a proverbial expression for the most improbable occurrence.” This is how Paul uses the phrase. Just as knowledge transcends mere human discovery, so the kind of faith which is a gift here transcends mere human capacity and expectation. But there is no need either to defend or to attack worldviews relating to “miracle.” The verb μεθιστάνειν means to remove an object from one place and to transfer it to another, here used as part of the proverbial imagery. Finally, πασαν τήν πίσην is likely to be a generic use of all: gifts of every kind of faith. But it may signify either an ideal (Godet), i.e., all possible faith, or an ultimate, i.e., absolute faith (Moffatt, Hering).
