Anti-Imperial Subtexts in Paul 327 assumptions he makes are inexplicable on the basis of those texts alone. I would argue that at least two of them are traceable exclusively to Dan 7. One is the eternal subordination of the Son, which neither Ps 8 nor Ps 110 demand, especially when they are read in such a blatantly Christological manner. Indeed, they might more naturally be taken to imply parity between the Father and the Son. It is, on the other hand, comparatively easy to see how the idea of subordination could be inferred from the approach of the one like the Son of Man to the throne of the Ancient of Days in Dan 7,13. The other assumption Paul makes might be termed, for want of a better word, the “transferability” of the kingdom. This lies at the heart of what is going on in Dan 7. The “everlasting kingdom” intriguingly changes hands a couple of times within the narrative (from God to the Son of Man to the saints and back), and it is not always easy to follow “whose” the kingdom is at any given moment (Dan 7,14.21.27). Perhaps this accounts for the (uncharacteristically Pauline) absolute use of basileiva of in 1 Cor 15,24 noted above (cf. n. 64). In any case, the theology 1 Corinthians evokes this very dynamic: God’s reign is currently being challenged by the rulers of this world (1 Cor 2,8), but the saints will reign with Christ (1 Cor 4,8) until all authority and power have been subjugated to him and the last enemy has been defeated (1 Cor 15,24-25), at which time the Son will give over the kingdom to God (1 Cor 15,28). 2. Paul’s Expectation that the Saints will Judge the World In 1 Cor 6,2, Paul rebukes the Corinthian Christians for suing each other in Roman law courts. Using an a maiore ad minus rhetorical strategy, he reminds them that they should be able to deal with such conflicts within the church, since “the saints will judge the world” (oiJ a{gioi to;n kovsmon krinou'sin). The way he introduces this assertion, “don’t you know…” (oujk oi[date o{ti…) makes it clear that Paul assumed the Corinthians would, in fact, be familiar with this tenant, possibly because he had expounded on the subject during his one and a half year sojourn in Corinth (67). Though there have been some dissenting voices (68), the majority of scholars believe that Paul is (67) This necessitates in itself, however, neither the view of CONZELMANN, Korinther, 133, that the teaching was a “Lehrstück des urchristlichen Katechismus”, nor that of S. KIM, “Jesus, Sayings of”, DPL, 482, that the formula indicates teachings of Jesus that Paul personally conveyed to the Corinthian church. (68) Cf. A. C. THISELTON, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (NIGTC; Grand Rapids, MI 2000) 425-427.