Was James an Apostle?: A Reflection on a New Proposal for Gal. I 19Author(s): George HowardSource: Novum Testamentum, Vol. 19, Fasc. 1 (Jan., 1977), pp. 63-64Published by: BRILLStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1560803 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 03:17

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

BRILL is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Novum Testamentum.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.44.79.149 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 03:17:11 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Novum Testamentum, Vol. XIX, fasc. I

WAS JAMES AN APOSTLE? A Reflection on a New Proposal for Gal. i i9

BY

GEORGE HOWARD Athens, Georgia

In a recent issue of this journal L. P. TRUDINGER proposed a new translation for the problematic passage of Gal. i 19 1). The passage contains the well-known problem of whether Paul con- sidered James as one of the apostles. TRUDINGER suggests that -repov here may have a comparative force and that Paul's meaning might be: "Other than the apostles I saw none except James, the Lord's brother." This would exclude James from the apostles. TRUDINGER gives two examples from classical literature which he says are parallel to Gal. i 19: (I) Th. i. 28 cplhous 7cotLaL.t . . .&TipouS

t&.v v5v 6vmCo, which he translates: "to make friends other than

those they now had", and (2) De Mundo, spuriously accredited to Aristotle, in which Ether is described as atroLXsov oi5av vrepov -Cv

eGaaGpv, onXpcaTov 2), which he translates: "being an element other than the four, indestructible".

I would like to speak against the proposal for the following reasons:

I. The two examples given by TRUDINGER do not actually bear out the meaning which he ascribes to Gal. i 19. trpoS in each instance makes a comparison between persons or objects of the same class of things. Thus while the Corcyraeans might have been forced against their will "to make friends other than those they now had", the erspouS belong to the same species of beings as the former, that is, both are friends. Again, while Ether is described as "being an element other than the four", still it is an element along with the four.

1) L. P. TRUDINGER, ""ETEPON AE TON AIIOZTOAL2N OYK EIAON, EI MH IAKfBON. A Note on Galatians i I9", Novum Testamentum, 17 (1975), 200-202.

2) Aristotelis Opera Omnia, Vol. III (Paris, 1887), p. 628, and W. D. Ross (ed.) The Works of Aristotle, Vol. III (Oxford, 1931), P. 392; as quoted in TRUDINGER. The fem. o5ao,

of course, refers to ao0lpoc.

This content downloaded from 185.44.79.149 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 03:17:11 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

64 GEORGE HOWARD

2. The meaning which TRUDINGER suggests can be expressed by the neuter of -rspoq. This may be used with a comparative force to distinguish between objects coming from different classes of things. Thus it is possible to say "a man is something other than a horse or a rock", i.e., trepov 0 & Avp knou i 7rpaq. In this instance f?epov is unambiguously neuter, in no way modifying the nominative masculine &vqp. We find such a usage in Plato Prot. 333a: ~7spov vcaL o appoauvq aocpla, L6ptLov 81 &x&Tpov .p.r, "wisdom is some-

thing other than self-control and each is a portion of virtue". One may also acquire this meaning by using the neuter of trepoq in combination with 7nap&, o, or the dative case, e.g., Arist. Pol. I294a 25 6t ,J4V OiV 05 XOCL & rPoc 7%Q)kLTeLC' L1l 7ccp& r ovocpyiov 'P xoc 8-toxp0rlctv xao BalyopyxocvL; Xen. Cyr. 1.6.2 e Po6XLovT6 ae S'?OCMay

espoc xyovres I M 7 p& Tv Osv 1 alyca6xLevox; Diog. Laert. 3.53 o tt %Oq1 T() aCOM 7COcTPL *TQL eTepOq aTLV 7 OC4TO6 3).

3. In Gal. i g19 'repov naturally refers to "another (apostle)"

since Paul is speaking expressly of "apostles" and because the form is most certainly the masculine accusative object of stMov. If he had wished to distinguish James from the "apostles" he could have "written -epov U& J',robq &o r6XouS obx lov, p ~e 'I(xxoov, or used" "vrepov in combination with oxpoi or the dative case".

We have not attempted by these observations to solve the prob- lem of whether James was considered to be an apostle or not. Some ambiguity may still remain as LIGHTFOOT 4) and BURTON 5) explain, though both prefer to interpret Paul's words as including James within the apostolic community. However, the ambiguity that does remain lies within the force of Es t ., not 9,spov 6).

3) See also Plato Phd. 74a; Eurip. Orest. 345. 4) J. B. LIGHTFOOT, St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians (6th ed.; London:

Macmillan & Co., 188o), 84-85. 6) E. D. W. BURTON, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle

to the Galatians (ICC; New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1920), 6o. 6) I express my gratitude to Professor John SHELTON of the University

of Kiel for the helpful criticism he made on a rough draft of this paper.

This content downloaded from 185.44.79.149 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 03:17:11 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions