accommodate two mutually exclusive positions (the eating of idol food while condemning idolatry) as part of his larger rhetoric of reconciliation.5 Smit proposes that 8:4–6 along with 10:1–22 represent Paul’s theological argument (the effect eating idol food has on the Corinthians’ relationship to God) while 8:1–3 and 8:7–9:27 constitute his social argument (the effect that such meals have on fellow believers).6 Yeo posits that the content of 9:24–10:22 reflects Jewish halakhic concerns that address
Page 135