Peter Kirby wrote:I will make another post that should make the content of my arguments a little more clear.
Preliminaries : Interpolations
Ernst Barnikol concludes that this is the extent of the interpolation in Gal 2:7-8.
https://depts.drew.edu/jhc/barnikol.html
to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised 8 (for he who worked through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised worked also through me for mine to the Gentiles), 9 and when James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars,
Leaving this text:
On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel and perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. 10 Only, they asked us to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do.
Gal 1:18-20 appears to be an interpolation because of the addition of "again" in Gal 2:1, because it all but contradicts the assertion of 1:17 that he did not go to Jerusalem right away, and because it all but contradicts the assertion of 1:22 that he was still unknown to the churches of Judea, although the author is aware of these tensions and can't help but try to assert that the claim is not a lie (1:20).
1 Corinthians 15:7 will be (justifiably) assumed to be part of an interpolation.
Additional relevant data:
http://peterkirby.com/marcions-shorter- ... -paul.html
First Argument: Those arguing to uphold the law in Galatians believed in Jesus Christ. With James and sometimes Cephas on the other side of this issue, they also seem to have believed in Jesus Christ.
In Galatians 5, the argument of Paul's opponents can be detected by inverting his assertions.
Galatians 5:2
"Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you."
Inversion: You can accept circumcision, and Christ will still be of advantage to you.
Galatians 5:3
3 "I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law."
Inversion: You can accept circumcision without obligation to keep the whole law.
Galatians 5:4
4 "You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace."
Inversion: You are not severed from Christ if you keep the law.
Galatians 5:6
"For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love."
Inversion: In Christ Jesus, circumcision still counts for something.
Galatians 5:11
"But if I, brothers, still preach circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been removed."
So a follower of Jesus Christ can accept circumcision, and then they do not need to believe in the offense of the cross. (This is interesting...)
The upshot here is that the opponents may not believe in the cross, but they do believe in Christ Jesus. The idea that the opponents may not believe in the cross lends new meaning to Galatians 3:1.
"O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified. Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith?"
So it seems that there could be a disagreement regarding whether Jesus Christ was crucified. The common denominator and point of disagreement, on the other hand, appears to be Jesus Christ, what it takes to believe in him, whether his gospel is limited to Jews and the circumcised, whether Gentile converts need to become circumcised first, and whether Jews should be eating with Gentile converts who have not first become circumcised.
Second Argument: James and Cephas would be irrelevant to Paul if they didn't preach Jesus Christ.
Paul takes his authority from the revelation from God concerning his Son, Jesus Christ.
The others, such as James and Cephas, are a threat to Paul's authority because they also make claims regarding Jesus Christ. If they did not make claims regarding Jesus Christ, they could be ignored, just like all the other Jews who believed in the coming of a Messiah.
Paul's Gentile converts wouldn't accept the authority of some Jewish Jerusalemite group who only had messianism in a general sense in common. There's no reason they should. But if others could say that Paul has distorted the gospel regarding Jesus Christ (which is what Paul says about them -- they distort the gospel, Gal 1:7), then they could have sway over these converts and convince them that accepting the good news of Jesus Christ's salvation also involves accepting circumcision.
The shared claim to the gospel regarding Jesus Christ is what brought Paul into direct conflict with James, specifically, and all others who believed that the gospel of Christ was for the Jews and for those who accepted circumcision, generally.
It's also a bit strange that they'd be arguing over the name of Christ, one group denying the name being Jesus. There's absolutely no evidence of this being a source of disagreement. There's a lot of evidence of disagreement regarding the nature of this Jesus Christ and what the gospel entails.
Ben C. Smith asks:
Might it not be like an adherent to La Virgen de Guadalupe approaching an influential bishop who is not an adherent, trying to get his stamp of approval for a mission in or near his diocese that involves the Virgin? Belief in Our Lady of Guadalupe is not essential to Catholic belief, and both our believing supplicant here and the unbelieving bishop are still Catholics. Likewise, might Paul have approached James simply as a fellow messianist and influential Jew interested in the Diaspora as part of an attempt to get his approval and thereby the support of local synagogues or other Jewish groups under James' sway? Paul's belief that the messiah had already appeared in some obscure way could be like his own Virgin of Guadalupe, so to speak, which James tolerates but does not personally endorse.
If we allow that James did not disagree with naming Christ as Jesus, then this has my full endorsement.
If we don't, then my credulity is stretched to the breaking point, that Paul would force himself to deal with these people, even though they didn't share anything in common besides a Judaism and a belief in a coming Messiah, which was extremely common in Judaism. They are a millstone around his neck, they contradict his teachings, they require his material support, and they otherwise disrupt his preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles. If they didn't even believe in a Jesus Christ, they wouldn't have the same ability and authority to disrupt Paul's mission, because they would be just like any other disbelieving Jews. They could be dismissed as simply ignorant of Jesus Christ. A vast number of disbelieving Jews expected a Messiah one day. The thorn in Paul's side is that these people are believing, i.e., they are
believing in Jesus Christ and contradicting Paul's message about Jesus Christ. And it is from Jesus Christ that Paul claims his authority, so this is how they are undercutting Paul's authority. This is what forces him to the table.
It may be a bit frustrating how difficult it is to prove a bunch of specific things, but that's only because the letters just don't offer the precise kind of explicit statements we want either way. Does this damage the idea that they both believe in Jesus Christ? On the contrary, if they didn't believe in Jesus Christ, this is much more likely to come up. It would be a beautiful polemical
coup de grâce. "
They don't even know about Jesus!"
Third Argument: Paul, Apollos, Cephas, and John are "apostles" and believers called to preach the mysteries of God regarding Jesus Christ. Paul, more specifically, is an apostle to the Gentiles. (Premises 4-5 below.)
Therefore, according to Paul's understanding of what apostleship is, they believe in Jesus Christ. (Premises 1-3 below.)
Premise (1) : Apostles serve Christ (and, to Paul, "Christ" is Jesus Christ).
Supporting data (1)(a): Apostles are "servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God."
1 Cor 4:1,6,9-10
This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God. ... I have applied all these things to myself and Apollos ... For I think that God has exhibited us apostles as last of all, like men sentenced to death, because we have become a spectacle to the world, to angels, and to men. We are fools for Christ's sake, but you are wise in Christ.
Supporting data (1)(b): People were "in Christ" before Paul and "well known to the apostles."
Romans 16:7
Greet Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners. They are well known to the apostles, and they were in Christ before me.
Supporting Data (1)(c): Paul tightly associates his call to being an apostle with serving Christ Jesus.
Rom 1:1,5-6
Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations, including you who are called to belong to Jesus Christ.
1 Cor 1:1
Paul, called by the will of God to be an apostle of Christ Jesus, and our brother Sosthenes,
2 Cor 1:1
Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother,
Gal 1:1
Paul, an apostle—not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead—
1 Thessalonians 2:6
Nor did we seek glory from people, whether from you or from others, though we could have made demands as apostles of Christ.
Premise (2) : A distinguishing mark of apostleship is seeing "Jesus our Lord."
1 Cor 9:1
Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?
Premise (3) : The gospel was preached first to the Jews, then to the Gentiles. Paul is an "apostle to the Gentiles."
Rom 1:16
For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
Rom 11:13-14
Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry in order somehow to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them.
Rom 15:15-21
"But on some points I have written to you very boldly by way of reminder, because of the grace given me by God 16 to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles in the priestly service of the gospel of God, so that the offering of the Gentiles may be acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit. 17 In Christ Jesus, then, I have reason to be proud of my work for God. 18 For I will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me to bring the Gentiles to obedience—by word and deed, 19 by the power of signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God—so that from Jerusalem and all the way around to Illyricum I have fulfilled the ministry of the gospel of Christ; 20 and thus I make it my ambition to preach the gospel, not where Christ has already been named, lest I build on someone else's foundation, 21 but as it is written, “Those who have never been told of him will see, and those who have never heard will understand.”
Premise (4): Cephas, like Apollos and Paul, appears to be a believer in Jesus Christ.
Supporting Data (4)(a): It's implied here that they are all teaching about the "Lord Jesus Christ."
1 Cor 1:10-13 & 3:22
10 I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment. 11 For it has been reported to me by Chloe's people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. 12 What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?
... whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future—all are yours, ...
Supporting Data (4)(b): If Cephas isn't directly called an apostle here (and it's certainly not excluded), he does have the right to take a "believing wife" in a passage regarding the rights of an apostle.
1 Cor 9:1-2 & 5
Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are not you my workmanship in the Lord? If to others I am not an apostle, at least I am to you, for you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord. ... Do we not have the right to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas? ...
Premise (5): In Jerusalem there were apostles before Paul, such as Cephas and James.
If Barnikol is correct about the extent of the interpolation, it's only a little harder to see that James and Cephas are among the apostles in Jerusalem. Their names are delayed until Gal 2:11-12, where Paul shows himself emerging victorious in an argument in Antioch, after the initial mention of the apostles in Jerusalem in 1:17.
Galatians 1:15-17, 2:7-10, 2:11-14
But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to[e] me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone; nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.
7 On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel and perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. 10 Only, they asked us to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do.
11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. 13 And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. 14 But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?”
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown