Did Paul Have a Memory Lapse in 1 Corinthians 1:15-16?

The Problem

Paul’s apparent forgetfulness in 1 Corinthians 1:15-16 produces distinct problems regarding one’s view of inspiration and the inerrancy of Scripture. If Paul forgot, and he is backtracking on what he said, then inerrancy almost certainly goes out the window. Is this a reasonable way to read what is going on in 1 Corinthians?

The Solution

Paul said, “I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name. (I did baptize also the household of Stephanas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized anyone else.)” (1 Corinthians 1:15-16, ESV). Based on what is said here, it seems clear that Paul was forgetful; however, there is solid reason to believe that this is not the case. To begin with, it is necessary to point out that the parentheses in the verse and other forms of punctuation are a form of interpretation. The original Greek manuscripts had no punctuation. Thus, the translators of the English Standard Version determined where the punctuation should go and decided that the parentheses are an aside (like an afterthought). It seems to go without saying that punctuation can have a major effect on how one understands a certain point. For example, “Let’s eat, grandma” is not the same as “Let’s eat grandma”. A single comma can make a huge difference. That being said, there is little reason to think that what Paul is doing here is being forgetful (at least not by accident). There are two main points to be discussed on this. First, this letter to the Corinthians is focused heavily on wisdom and knowledge that the Corinthians claim to have but lack in actuality. When looking at Logos Bible
Software, one can see huge spikes in the use of these words in 1 Corinthians, enough so that I would argue the theme of 1 Corinthians is based around the comparison of wisdom and knowledge of the world to that of the wisdom and knowledge of God. The fruit of this is seen in how the Corinthians are not living in the way that they should be.

Second, the way that this letter was written would require that whatever goes in the letter be intentional. Either Paul is writing the letter himself, realizes he doesn’t remember, and still decides to write that in, or his secretary heard Paul backtracking over his own words and decided that this clearly needed to be in the letter anyway. Given 1 Corinthians 16:21, it is more than reasonable to conclude that Paul used a secretary for most of 1 Corinthians. Either way, one must posit that the backtracking was intentionally kept in the manuscript as standard forgetfulness. This is a huge leap considering there is a better answer, namely that Paul was making a rhetorical move. His point in the passage is that it does not matter who was baptized by whom. Paul is saying that he was sent to preach the gospel, not to baptize (and see! He doesn’t even remember all those whom he baptized). That is how little it matters; he is intentionally downplaying his knowledge to counteract the so-called knowledge of the Corinthians. Even if we assume that the secretary wrote it in, it could still have been blotted out. It is not as though the secretary would just write the letter and then seal it and send it. Paul and the secretary would go over the letter to make sure it said what Paul wanted it to say. It is highly unlikely that some forgetful rambling would make it into the final letter to be sent to the Corinthians.

Conclusion

Overall, the best explanation of the evidence in 1 Corinthians and how the letters were often written points firmly away from the idea that Paul had a memory slip and toward the view that he was using intentional rhetoric. The main reason it looks like a memory slip is because of the consistent interpretive move of putting parentheses around the phrase. First Corinthians 1:15-16 does not show a memory slip.