sschlichter

Gal 2:1-10

Toto

Where exactly does Paul say that he corroborated his gospel? He seems to dance around the question in Galatians Reading between the lines, Paul went to the Jerusalem Church, and they agreed he could preach to the gentiles if he kept out of sight and kicked back the usual dues (for "the poor.") But the Pillars (so called) did not adopt Paul's message, and they added nothing to his.

This sounds like it is all about the holy spirit and grace, and a truce between people who agreed to disagree, and Paul learned nothing about the historical Jesus or the message of the Jerusalem Church.

sschlichter

yes, if by 'danced around the subject' you mean he emphatically stated that he "presented to them the gospel that I preach among the Gentiles. But I did so only in a private meeting with the influential people, to make sure that I was not running - or had not run - in vain.

"when they saw that I was entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised just as Peter was to the circumcised (for he who empowered Peter for his apostleship to the circumcised also empowered me for my apostleship to the Gentiles)"

"them" in verse 2 and "they" in verse 8 being "James, Cephas, and John, who had a reputation as pillars" (v 9)

there is no request to stay out of sight - this is evidenced by Peters visit to the gentile church.

their message was in harmony because it was under Paul's and Peter's shared understanding that he rebuked Peter for his hypocrisy in not living freely under that understanding in v14.

Vinnie

I concur. The figures of Lincoln and Washington were famous public officials who made a splash during their lives in a more connected, technologically advanced and better documented era. The historicity of Jesus is still secure, even if the evidence for him does not compare to that of the historical Lincoln!

Vinnie

spin

It always comes to people depending on disputed texts.

Paul usually refers to the third pillar as Cephas. He uses that name only through 1 Corinthians, but when we come to Galatians, while mentioning Cephas, he suddenly starts talking about Peter, and then goes back to talking about Cephas. The two verses about Peter in the works of Paul are here, 2:7-8. Otherwise we have information about Cephas. This sudden use of Peter needs explanation, especially when a text called the Epistle of the Apostles has no problem talking of both Cephas and Peter as two separate entities (EpAp. 2, "We, John, Thomas, Peter, Andrew, James, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Nathanael, Judas Zelotes, and Cephas, write unto the churches of the east and the west....").

Gal 2:9 tells us that all the pillars were to go to the circumcised. This clashes with the claim that Peter (and no-one else) was for the circumcised (as Paul was for the uncircumcised).

Then we ask what is the use of the "on the contrary" (tounantion) which starts 2:7? How does it really attach to what came before? Brief answer it doesn't really at all.

In short we must hold Gal 2:7-8 suspect and of no argumentative weight.

When we look at the notion of who exactly these pillars are using only Paul's information, we cannot inject our biases from the gospel material. These pillars are the leaders of a religious group in Jerusalem that Paul doesn't tell us too much about, other than he was in strong disagreement with them and that he thought they didn't offer anything of value. We cannot assume with everyone else that we are dealing with apostles of Jesus. (We already see the manipulating hand of the apostolic tradition which has insinuated Peter into this text.)

Paul's conflict with the people in Jerusalem may be that they, messianists of the John the Baptist flavor do not accept the messiah of Paul. After all, Paul's gospel didn't come from them, but from direct revelation of Jesus from god (Gal. 1:11-12). Paul, who claims to have been a devout conservative Jew (1:14), had been reacting against deviation from the conservative norm. Hence messianists were targets. At some stage in his zeal he had a change of heart and received his own messianist revelation, which set him off on his own course. That led him to seek out other messianists, such as those in Jerusalem, and the persecutor became of sorts a believer of the views that he had persecuted.

We need to evaluate the texts without injecting views from others (at least until we can say that the other texts are really relevant, eg they are chronologically prior and causally related to the content we are investigating), otherwise all we are doing is reproducing conventional apologetic.


spin

Doug Shaver

It does appear that he had some concern about whether his preaching agreed with the others' preaching, and that he was pleased to discover that it did. There is no suggestion, though, either in that passage or anywhere else in Paul's writings, that he was prepared to adjust his message to conform to theirs if there had been any differences.

sschlichter

I guess you are right, but his concern for running in vain seems to be assuaged. I guess we will never know if he was willing to adjust his message.

sschlichter

'on the contrary' may refer to the fact that those he met with did not object (or add to ) his message. (end of v 6) regardless, verse 9 is reason enough to come to the conclusion that Galatians says Paul sought and received confirmation of his message.

I do not think Peter and Cephas need to be the same person to come to this conclusion.

The conflict of Paul that you are suggesting...

is most definitely not described in the text at all. (or any NY text)

Vinnie

I just read an article from Ehrman on this, quite fascinating. Though I think his view raises a few problems of its own.

Vinnie

bacht

There's an echo of conflict in this passage from Acts (Paul never mentions JtB in the epistles afaik):

Now a Jew named Apol'los, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was an eloquent man, well versed in the scriptures.
He had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things concerning Jesus, though he knew only the baptism of John. He began to speak boldly in the synagogue; but when Priscilla and Aq'uila heard him, they took him and expounded to him the way of God more accurately.
And when he wished to cross to Acha'ia, the brethren encouraged him, and wrote to the disciples to receive him. When he arrived, he greatly helped those who through grace had believed, for he powerfully confuted the Jews in public, showing by the scriptures that the Christ was Jesus.

While Apol'los was at Corinth, Paul passed through the upper country and came to Ephesus. There he found some disciples.
And he said to them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" And they said, "No, we have never even heard that there is a Holy Spirit."
And he said, "Into what then were you baptized?" They said, "Into John's baptism."
And Paul said, "John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus."
On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them; and they spoke with tongues and prophesied.

Acts 18.24-19.6