Peter, Jerusalem and Gal 1.13 - 2.14

7/31/2019 Peter, Jerusalem and Gal 1.13 - 2.14

1/10

Novum Testamentum XXV, 4 (1983)

PETER, JERUSALEM AND GALATIANS 1:13-2:14

by

G. D. KILPATRICK

Oxford

In honoremProfessor Dr Reicke

Professor Bo Reicke has done much for the study of the history of

N T times amon g other things, and this paper is offered to him as a

small acknowledgement of how much I owe to him as a friend and

as a scholar. It begins with problems of language and text and ends

with problems of history and interpretation, a recognition of the

width of his own interests.Recently I was looking again at the use of and

in Luke-Acts, and in this connection it occurred to me to

reexamine these two Greek forms of the name in the epistles of

Paul.

This examination produced the following results:

: Gal 1:17, 18; 2:1

: Rom 15:19, 25, 26, 31; 1 Cor 16:3; Gal 4:25, 26. At

1 Co r 16:3 we have the var iant A, but apart from this

the ordinary text seems firm and it will be assumed that it is right in

this particular at all these instances.

What is the relation of ' and ? is

a transliteration of the Hebrew and ' is a Hellenized

derivat ive. In keeping with this, is the form used in the

LXX.1

Matthew (except for 23:37), Mark and John have

', as do Philo and Josephus, but Luke has except for at 2:22; 19:28; 23:7 (cf. 13:22). Acts uses


2/10

PETER, JERUSALEM AND GALATIANS 319

From the evidence above we would infer that Paul normally uses

, but in the section Gal 1:17-2:1 he uses '.

Can we find another example of variation between the more and

the less obviously Semitic forms of a name? There is one which

relates to Gal 1:17-2:1, the variation -.2

Outside Gal

1:18-2:14 does not appear in the Pauline epistles, but

recurs at 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22; 9:5; 15:5 without a variant.

In Gal 1:18-2:14 the pattern is more complicated and may be

represented as follows:

Gal 1:18 ac

D F G L L ^6'

5 1* 33

2:7 omnes

2:8 omnes

2:9 4 6

D F G L vt vg(pt) C L Y

2:11 D F G K L c o L v t vg(pt) A C H

2:14 D F G K L P 0 ) I v t vg(pt) IA6

tf A C 33

Here we notice that D F G and allies consistently have , but

except for 2:7, 8 C 33 have , while the Syrian witnesses

and P4 6

are not consistent. This however does not help us to decide

which reading is right where there are variants.

One thing does leap to the eye. The section for ' Gal

1:17-2:1 and the possible section for Gal 1:18-2:14 overlap

and indeed might have been coextensive, for the only termination

for the area is at Gal 4:25, 26. Inside this

section is firmly fixed in the text at 2:7, 8. We may infer

from this that the original text of Galatians had throughout

Gal 1:18-2:14 and that the variants with at Gal 1:18; 2:9, 11,

14 are secondary. The task of explaining how the readings with

came into being we must take up later.

To these two instances of the preference for forms at home in nor

mal Greek over those which proclaim their Semitic origin I am encouraged by Dr. J. C. O'Neill to add a third. The words ,


3/10

320 G. D. KILPATRICK

, , , ;

Rom 11:1 ; , ',

; and Rom 9:3-5. Of the Jewish way Paul writes:

(Rom 9:31).

Let us now turn to details:

(1) (Rom 15:31, 2 Cor 1:16; Gal 1:22; 1 Thess 2:14). O n

the evidence is not significant for our passage, but we may

compare 1 Thess 2:14 (

) with Gal 1:22 ( ).

(2) and . We have Titus 1:14 () and Gal 2:14 ( ) where

does not imply any identification with Judaism. The two words

occur only in these passages in early Christian literature (cf. Ign.

Magn. 8:1 [v.l. gA]).

(3) . There are Gal 2:14 (

) and Ign. Magn. 10:3 (

). Again we seem to have an external description =

.

(4) , We have Gal 1:13 (

) and 1:14 ( ). It occurs thrice

in Ignatius {Magn. 8:1: ; 10:3: -

' -

; Phld. 6:1: .). Again

we have an external presentation.

(5) 'Iouau ^(G al 2:13, 14, 15; 3:28. occurs too frequentlyin early Christian literature to be very significant, but it is note

worthy that it rather than , occurs in Gal

1:13-2:14.

(6) (Gal 1:14); etc. (Gal. 1:16). In

Luke-Acts is the people of God, Israel, and the Gentiles.

Only when Jews are speaking before Gentiles or in a Gentile con

text do they use ' of themselves (Luke 7:5; 23:2; Acts 10:22;

24:2, 10, 17; 26:4). In this connection Acts 28:19 is particularly

interesting The practice of Paul differs from this in two respects


4/10


In conclusion the terms , , etc.

seem to suggest not only a view of Israel from the outside but also a

reluctance to identify with Israel.

Before we proceed further we may again delimit the

autobiographical passage. It begins at Gal 1:13 rather than Gal

1:17, and so from now on our enquiry will be directed to the whole

of Gal 1:13-2:14.

Having noticed the unusual features presented by the terms

, and etc. in the Pauline context, we

search for other unusual features in Gal 1:13-2:14, and we find thetwo rare words (1:18) and (2:14). These

suggest that the language of the passage should be examined to see

how far it presents unusual features.

To do this we proceed straight through Gal 1:13-2:14 noticing

un-Pauline items as we come to them:

1:13 . recurs at 1:23. At both places there is the

variant (FGL pt). occurs in the Greek Bibleand early Christian texts at Acts 9:21; 4 Mace 4:23; 11:4.

1:17 . This form recurs at Gal 1:18; 2:1; 3 Kgdms

13:12; John 6:3; Gos Eb 4; Rom 15:28 ().

and are variants at 1:17 ( A L

: ] IA6; f

5 1B D F G pe); 1:18 (

4 6]

33, 119*v l d

, 1898, Cb); John 6:3 (]

* D ); 3 Kgdms 13:12 (] Api).

We may suspect that this variation is at least partly caused

by a palaeographical confusion, . We may also notice

2:1 ] C Chron.

. occurs here in Paul but elsewhere in

early Christianity at Mark 14:40 (v.l.); Luke-Acts (30x);

Heb 7:1; 2 Pet 2:21; Herrn Man 4.1.7; Gos Pet 14:58.

1:18 . is a rare word occurring in the Greek

Bible at 1 Esdr 1:33 (2x), 42; Acts 17:23 (v.l.).3

1:19 ... . This construction seems to be unparallelled


5/10

322 G. D . KILPATRICK

1:23 . The me anin g ofhere seems to be uncom mon.

If it means " t h e faith," we may compare Eph 4:5, 13; Jude

3, 20; but if it means " t h e body of bel ievers," it seems

unique.

2:1 . recurs in the Greek Bible

and early Christianity at Gen 19:17; Job 1:4; 3 Mace 1:1;

Acts 12:25; 15:37, 38.

2:1,2 . recurs in Paul only in quotations at Rom

10:6 (LXX); 1 Cor. 2:9 (unknown). Elsewhere in the N T it

appears in the Gospels and Acts, Ephesians and Revelation.2:2 . is also at Acts 25:14, and in a different

sense at Mart. Pol. 2:1 . Th er e is a variant (F

G = L exposui). This would be an unusual use of

and, if it were original, we may conclude that

is a correction. Neither word is Pauline.

' . This is only here in Paul.

2:3, 6 and . The meaning is the same at

2:6 ( ) and 2:9 ( ).

Used absolutely in this way the word is rare and un-Pauline.

2:4 . This is only here in the N T . For the verb see

2 Pet 2:1 ().

. This occurs only here in early Christian

texts.

2:5 . appears only in this passage in early Christian

literature. ( A C[?] F G al), recurs in the NT

at Luke 1:22; 22:28; He b 1:11 (LXX); 2 Pet 3:4.

2:6 . This is an unusual expression in the NT.

. occurs only here and at 1:16 in

the N T .

2:7 . This phrase does not occur

elsewhere in the NT. It seems to mean "the preaching to the

uncircumcised."

2:8 Only here is it accompanied by the plain dative


6/10


2:10 . This is used by Paul at Col 4:18; 1 Thess

1:3; 2:9; 2 Thess 2:5; but it is used of persons only at Luke

17:32; Heb 13:7.

2:11 . This appears only here in Paul of persons.

. occurs also at 1 John 3:20,

21; Mark 7:2 (D).

2:12 . with the infinitive is at Luke 2:21;

22:15; John 1:48; 13:19; 17:5; Acts 23:15.

. This is combined with only here in the NT.

Elsewhere it occurs with the dative (Luke 15:2; Acts 10:41;11:3; 1 Cor 5:11).

. is active only here in the NT.4

The

middle is at Acts 20:20, 27; Heb 10:38; and perhaps at 2 Cor

8:20 ( F G). We might join together

... .

. The active is at Matt 13:49; 25:32 (2x);

Luke 6:22; Acts 13:2; 19:9; Gal 1:15; and the passive is at

Rom 1:1; 2 Cor 6:17 (LXX). The expression

is rare.

2:13 . The noun is at Matt 23:28; Mark 12:15; Luke

12:1; 1 Tim 4:2; 1 Pet 2:1, and at Luke 20:20.

The agent noun is more frequent (Matthew[10x];

Mark 7:6; Luke 6:42; 12:56; 13:15). The whole group is un-

Pauline.

. This occurs only here in the NT.. The word recurs at 2 Pet 3:17 and Rom 12:16

().

2:14 . This occurs only here in Greek before the

second century A.D.5

. This occurs here only, but occurs at Matt

5:47; 6:7; 18:17; 3 John 7.

. with an adverb of time is at Matt 27:63; Acts25:24; Heb 7:25, and with other adverbs at Luke 15:13; 2

Ti 3 12 I b P li i h d b


7/10

324 G. D . KILPATRIGK

This examination of the vocabulary of Gal 1:13-2:14 suggests

that these verses have a large number of unusual features. Taken

separately many of them, for example , would not be so

significant. After all has to appear in writ ing for the first

time somewhere or other, and why should it not be in Paul? One or

two words of that kind would be noteworthy, but would not raise

problems. However, we have more than one or two.

Qu it e as significant are the words which Paul uses with one con

struction elsewhere and another here (e.g. [1:19];

[2:8]; [2:12]). We can only conclude that a real differenceof language exists between Gal 1:13-2:14 and the Pauline epistles as

a whole.

Ho w are we to explain these differences between ourpassage and

the rest of Paul, the use of ' and against

and and the difference in language? One ex

planation would be that 1:13-2:14 is an interpolation. Interpolation

was a common explanation for difficulties of this kind for some

nineteenth-century scholars, but such a theory has its difficulties.

For example, it has been argued that Romans 16 did not

originally belong to Romans but was a later addition. Recently it

has been pointed out that the chapter is an organic part of

Romans.6

For treating Romans 16 as a later addition there was a

little textual evidence, but for treating Gal 1:13-2:14 in this way

there is none. In these circumstances we would need incontroverti

ble reasons for treating the passage in Galatians as secondary.Are there such reasons? The first question to be answered in this

connection is, Are there other, more defensible explanations of the

peculiar features in our passage? There seem to be at least two.

First, the Apostle may be using a memorandum which he drew up

immediately after the events for his own convenience or for chur

ches dependent on him. Such a memorandum might be echoing the

terms used in discussions at such centres as Antioch and Tarsus.

Even today it is sometimes a useful practice immediately after con

t t d t f th di Th i


8/10

PET ER, JERUSAL EM AND GALATI ANS 325

The second explanation is a variation of the first, namely, that

the Apostle is using a memorandum drawn up by someone else whowas on the same side in these dissensions. This hypothesis would

assume that the Apostle rephrased the memorandum to read as

though it was written by him without removing the features which

make it unusual among Pauline writings. In other words this ex

planation also leaves a number of unusual expressions unaccounted

for.

If the incorporation of his own memorandum for the Church at

Antioch seems the more likely explanation of the unusual featuresin this passage from the Apostle, we may recognize possible

parallels. At 1 Cor 11:23-25 we have a piece of tradition from which

the Apostle seems to part company in two particulars. As I hope to

show in another place, a possible explanation of this is that 1 Corin

thians 11 is a tradition which derives from Antioch but does not

square in all particulars with the Apostle's own. 1 Corinthians 13

also is a passage which for all its impressiveness is surprisingly outof line with the Apostle's own argumentation and manner.

Granted that Gal 1:13-2:14 was originally a memorandum

drawn up by the Apostle for the Church at Antioch, what conse

quences follow from this? First, the dating of the epistle is affected.

It has been argued that the epistle was written soon after the last

event mentioned in Galatians 2, i.e. before the Council of

Jerusalem of Acts 15. On the memorandum theory this ground for

dating Galatians disappears. The hypothesis allows us to date theepistle any time within reason after the last event of Galatians 2.

Secondly, we have more insight into the ways in which the

Apostle composed his letters. Quite clearly he did not always write

or dictate them straight off without premeditation. He seems to

have drawn on materials which he had to hand, incorporating them

as seemed fitting to the occasion.

Thirdly, we may infer that the Church at Antioch played agreater part in events in the period A.D. 40-70 than is sometimes


9/10

326 G. D. KILPATRIGK

evidence of our manuscripts. We cannot demonstrate in strict logic

that the truth will always be found among them, but for ourinquiries this remains a sound rule of thumb.

We now must look at the reading in Gal 1:18-2:14. It

presents us with two questions: (1) how did the reading come

into being? and (2) why does it not occur in 2:7, 8?

The first question may be answered from the evidence of 1 Cor

1:12; 3:22; 9:5; 15:5. Someone assimilated the passages in Gala

tians to 1 Corinthians. Such assimilations occur; for example,

in Acts 18:24; 19:1 was assimilated to the of 1Corinthians.

7

The answer to the second question is twofold. First, on the

evidence, correctors were not always systematic. We can see this

from the trea tment of the formula in the Gospels.

Secondly, it is possible that the reading once existed at Gal

2:7, 8 but has not survived in our manuscripts. We may compare

John 11:25 where the reading was predictable but not knownfrom our manuscripts until it turned up in P4 5

.

We have now one problem left. How are we tc account for the

"un usua l expressions unaccounted for"? We may notice, despite

its distinctive character, the considerable variety of the Pauline style

and we may associate this variety with the variety in the various

communities to which the letters were addressed. Some of the

peculiar features of Romans may be explained in this way. Perhaps

the style of Gal 1:13-2:14 was directed to the community atAntioch.

7See George Dunbar Kilpatrick, "Apollos-Apelles," JBL 89 (1970) 77.


10/10

^ s

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use

according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as

otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the

copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,

reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a

violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission

from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journaltypically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,

for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.

Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specificwork for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered

by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the

copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS

collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the AmericanTheological Library Association.

Peter, Jerusalem and Gal 1.13 - 2.14

Documents

Transcript of Peter, Jerusalem and Gal 1.13 - 2.14