The text of 2 Cor. 6.14-7.1, commonly called the ''fragment'', has been the focus of much debate, due largely to its enigmatic presence within the context of 2.14-7.4. This work forges a new line of research on the problem of contextual disruption through an examination of the Old Testament traditions used within the fragment (their source, redactional focus and theology). Next, a similar traditions study is pursued in the current literary context of 2.14-7.4. A surprising degree of continuity between the fragment and its context is discovered in the use of Old Testament traditions, particularly those relating to new covenant and second exodus (exilic return) traditions. From this investigation a contextual hypothesis is proposed, along with a critique of competing contextual theories. The book concludes with two appendices which apply the contextual hypothesis to the crucial interpretative issue in 6.14a. Although the author''s contextual hypothesis is not dependent upon any one interpretative solution in 6.14a, it nonetheless offers some fresh insight into the questions of who the ''unbelievers'' are and what the ''unequal yoke'' is.

The text of 2 Cor. 6.14-7.1, commonly called the ''fragment'', has been the focus of much debate, due largely to its enigmatic presence within the context of 2.14-7.4. This work forges a new line of research on the problem of contextual disruption through an examination of the Old Testament traditions used within the fragment (their source, redactional focus and theology). Next, a similar traditions study is pursued in the current literary context of 2.14-7.4. A surprising degree of continuity between the fragment and its context is discovered in the use of Old Testament traditions, particularly those relating to new covenant and second exodus (exilic return) traditions. From this investigation a contextual hypothesis is proposed, along with a critique of competing contextual theories. The book concludes with two appendices which apply the contextual hypothesis to the crucial interpretative issue in 6.14a. Although the author''s contextual hypothesis is not dependent upon any one interpretative solution in 6.14a, it nonetheless offers some fresh insight into the questions of who the ''unbelievers'' are and what the ''unequal yoke'' is.