Why does the dominant scholarship about "the body of Christ" in 1 Corinthians emphasize unity, which is the rhetoric of Stoicism? Whose unity? I am very much concerned about such a hegemonic interpretation.
"The body of Christ" was my dissertation topic long ago. I wrote a book about this, "Christ's Body in Corinth: The Politics of a Metaphor" (Fortress, 2008). Since then, I have delved into Paul's letters and sharpened my understanding of Paul's theology. I am still convinced that my alternative view of this metaphor makes sense. I am against the traditional reading that emphasizes unity (homonoia). There are different views of the body of Christ between Paul’s authentic letters and the disputed letters. While the latter clearly underscores the metaphorical organism, the former does not. But still, the traditional reading of the body of Christ even in 1 Cor 12 and Rom 12 is an organism. According to a metaphorical organism, “You are the body of Christ” (1 Cor 12 and Rom 12) is understood as “You are the community of Christ.” The emphasis of the traditional reading is unity; "You are one." But in an alternative reading, the body of Christ can be understood as a way of living; that is, it is a Christic body: Christlike body or living. This use of the genitive case is an attributive genitive and we see this kind of the attributive genitive in "the body of sin” (Rom 6:6), which we understand as "the sinful body." The alternative interpretation underscores the union with Christ and diversity. Here union, unlike unity in Stoicism, means the ethical one that Christians (Corinthians) have to embody Christ. So, "you are a Christic body, individually and communally." The Corinthians must follow the way of Christ and then they are united with Christ.
