There are times when a New Testament author makes an application of an Old Testament verse that is not at all obvious. Certainly, most people would not feel comfortable if a modern commentator made similar applications. 1 Corinthians 2:9 is an interesting case of that because we cannot even be sure Paul is quoting a verse from the Old Testament. A vast majority of commentators say that it is a quote or paraphrase of Isaiah 64:4.
In the NIV, this verse from Isaiah reads as follows:
Since ancient times no one has heard,
no ear has perceived,
no eye has seen any God besides you,
who acts on behalf of those who wait for him.
In the context of this section, the verse is speaking to the uniqueness of God. Israel is remembering how God has cared for them. There is no other god that has done this for them or for anyone else.
In the same version, 1 Corinthians 2:9 is translated as
However, as it is written:
“No eye has seen,
no ear has heard,
no mind has conceived
what God has prepared for those who love him”
This is definitely not a quote of Isaiah 64:4 and not a paraphrase as many commentators claim. A paraphrase maintains the same meaning even though the words are different. The focus of Paul's quotation is on the salvation that God has prepared — on the gospel, which is God's secret wisdom that is being revealed. This is very different from talking about the uniqueness of God. I have read that almost the same quote can be found in some apocryphal writings. The dating of those writings makes it likely that they borrowed from Paul rather than vice verse. Another possibility is that they are both quoting from a third source. It would not be the only occasion that Paul quoted something outside Scripture.
Regardless, the application is the same for the Corinthians and for us. I still would not mind finding a source that deals with this more completely.
Note: I looked at other translations but the NASB, ESV, and HCSB were all too painful to read to use here.
Comments
I think you have to be careful when you say, "This is definitely not a quote of Isaiah 64:4 and not a paraphrase," because the words preceding the quote identify it as the Word of God ("...as it is written"). I cannot vouch for every case in the New Testament, but whenever the Lord Jesus (or His apostles) said, "As it is written," He meant the inspired OT Scriptures. If you say it is not a quote or a paraphrase in a sense you are saying that there are other scriptures (apocrypha, etc.) that are the "word of God"--something I cringe at as a person who believe God has given us everything He wants us to have in the Canon of Scripture. CJ, perhaps I am misunderstanding you (!)...
I haven't read any commentaries recently on this verse, but from a quick comparison of the two verses (Is. 64:4 and 1 Cor. 2:9) I would say "waiting for God" (Is.) is comparable to "loving God" (1 Cor). The verses are similar. It reminds me of the verse in Eph. 4:8 where "He" [Christ] is changed from "You" [the LORD] in Ps. 68:18. Perhaps this is a bad example, but oftentimes the quotes in the NT are different. I agree though that sometimes we are left scratching our heads as to the inspired apostles' use of OT verses!
Posted by: David on Thursday, June 30, 2005
This is probably more of a semantics issue, but I feel uncomfortable saying it is a paraphrase when the meaning is so different. Yes, waiting and loving could be consider related. Yes, the structure is very similar. A summary of the two verses could be
Isaiah 64:4 - God is unique
1 Cor. 2:9 - Man cannot understand God's wisdom through human means
They say very different things. I guess we could say Paul used Isaiah 64:4 very liberally under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. We certainly do not have any other verse that could match to this one in the OT.
I don't have time at the moment to check this, but I don't remember any other epistle writers using " as it is written" besides Paul. Also, there is a section in Jude pulled from (similar to) apocryphal writings. I do not think that means those writings were inspired.
I should also mention there could be translation issues with Isaiah 64:4 - but I have not found the sources that deal with it to my satisfaction.
Posted by: CJ Costello on Thursday, June 30, 2005
I do not know Hebrew, but if Isaiah 64:4 were translated like this, it would fit much closer with the verse in 1 Corinthians:
Since the beginning of the world, no one has heard, no ear has perceived, no eye has seen, O God, what you have prepared for those who wait for you.
I think what I need to do is find a good translation of the Septuagint.
Also, I just found this in the New Bible Dictionary:
"Paul in 1 Cor. 2:9 cites by gegraptai [as it is written] a passage which, unless it is an extremely free rendering of Is. 64:4; is unidentifiable. ... It is perhaps worth considering whether Paul is quoting a saying of the Lord not recorded in our Gospels (as in Acts 20:35) and citing it as he would ‘scripture’."
Posted by: CJ Costello on Thursday, June 30, 2005
All questions of paraphrasing aside, isn't it possible that those particular words came into his head in that order because Paul knew the OT so well? My theory would be that his words in I Cor are based on the Isaiah passage, even if they are used in completely different ways.
Maybe it wouldn't hurt if modern commentators approached scripture interpretation in different ways? That really is a question...I don't read them to speak of.
David, I like your last sentence. (That is not intended to imply that I dislike your first sentences!)
Posted by: Shannon on Thursday, June 30, 2005
So I am starting to find commentaries that deal with this verse. I did not think to check the New Bible Dictionary at first. It talked about this in an entry on Scripture. It seems to be a reasonable resource. Another that I don't know much about is Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament by Archer and Chirichigno. It says 1 Corinthians 2:9 is "a noteworthy example of a conflate quotation from various passages written in a paraphrastic manner."
Posted by: CJ Costello on Monday, July 4, 2005
A follow-up to previous comments:
1. I suggested it could be a translation issue with Isaiah 64:4 - no.
2. I wondered if getting a translation of the Septuagint would help - no.
3. Who uses "gegraptai" in the NT?
Paul is the only letter writer to use it that I was able to find. The synoptic gospels use it. It occurs in quotes of Jesus during his temptation in the desert. If one of the authors of the gospels use it, they usually add more information ("in the prophets"). Acts is the only other NT book that I found it in. Similar to the gospels, it is often accompanied by further information as to the source of the quote. [Edit: 1 Peter 1:16 uses "gegraptai" - for it is written: "Be holy, because I am holy."]
Posted by: CJ Costello on Monday, July 4, 2005
Brother, I found an interesting interpretation concerning this matter from the Jamieson, Fausset and Brown commentary. I quote from it:
The quotation is not a verbatim one, but an inspired exposition of the "wisdom" ( 1Cr 2:6 , from Isa 64:4 ). The exceptive words, "O God, beside (that is, except) Thee," are not quoted directly, but are virtually expressed in the exposition of them ( 1Cr 2:10 ), "None but thou, O God, seest these mysteries, and God hath revealed them to us by His Spirit."
This makes reasonable sense and it fits with the context. Also I was thinking of a similar passage in Jam. 4:5 where James uses "the Scripture says" where no definite verse is in the Scripture (it rather seems to be an inspired interpretation of other verses in the Bible).
Posted by: David on Tuesday, July 5, 2005
This verse is a good example of how our assumptions can affect interpretation.
Here is a possible progression:
1. Paul uses "it is written" 31 times and in 30 cases the quotes are definitely from the OT. There are another 20+ uses in the gospels and Acts and in these cases they are OT quotes.
2. Thus, whenever "it is written" is used in the NT, it must be a quote of an OT passage.
3. 1 Corinthians 2:9 must be a quote of an OT verse since it uses "it is written" and it must be a quote of Isaiah 64:4 since that is the only verse close to it.
This type of approach does not allow for the possibility of the interpretations that have been mentioned in the above comments. My perspective is that it is too rigid. A rule for interpretation has been extracted from study of the text (based on a kind of inductive logic). Now every applicable verse must be understood in this framework - no exceptions allowed. I read at least one commentary that used this approach (or so I assume) and it resulted in trying to reinterpret/retranslate Isaiah 64:4 to fit Paul's quotation.
Posted by: CJ Costello on Wednesday, July 6, 2005
The most common usage of this verse that I have heard from Christians is in reference to heaven. I do not think the context completely excludes this, but a focus on the present fits better with Isaiah 64:4 and with this section of 1 Corinthians. This verse is referring to the secret wisdom of God that is now being revealed. It speaks to the gospel and the salvation that God prepared for us. Certainly this salvation has a future component, but I don't think that is what Paul was talking about.
Posted by: CJ Costello on Wednesday, July 6, 2005