Why do you think it has to be either/or?John2 wrote:Ben wrote:
I guess I'm having a hard time picturing Paul acting out the crucifixion before the eyes of the Galatians rather than convincing them with the OT that Jesus was crucified.In Acts 28.18 it is the showing that is in public; in Galatians 3.1 it is the προγράφειν that is before their eyes. That is the difference, and it demonstrates that προγράφειν has to mean something like "show" or "publicly display" rather than something like "write beforehand" — barring time travel. "It was publicly displayed before your eyes" makes sense. "It was written beforehand before your eyes" does not.
You were translating it as "was written before", were you not? Stegall is apparently taking the other option, the one I am pushing, "was publically portrayed". He is then applying this word, not to the penning of the prophecies in the Hebrew scriptures (hundreds of years earlier), but rather to Paul's preaching itself (just recently, before the Galatians' very eyes). This is how I think most exegetes interpret the word: they basically make it a metaphor for preaching, which is fine. (You are agreeing with Stegall's interpretation, but you originally disagreed with his translation.)This is just my initial impression of Gal. 3:1. I've never thought about it before and I'm still getting acquainted with commentaries about it. Stegall seems to put it the way I'm seeing it:
In Galatians 3:1, the phrase "was publically portrayed" is one word in Greek, prographo. This verb is in the aorist tense and indicative mood, indicating a past tense portrayal of Christ as One who stands crucified. Paul is referring to the message he preached to these Galatians in the past while they were unbelievers. This was the same message referred to in Galatians 1:8-9. What message had they now taken their eyes off of? Grace? Justification through faith alone? No, not merely these things, but the work of Christ on the cross from which God's grace and justification flows. This is why the entire section in Galatians 3:1-14 that deals so heavily with justification begins with a riveting rebuke to get their focus back on the cross that Paul initially preached to them (3:1).
https://books.google.com/books?id=uj9H4 ... ED&f=false
What I am wondering out loud in this thread is whether perhaps the word is not as metaphorical as it sounds.
Good find.But I suppose there is room here for Paul having acted out the crucifixion in the manner that Longenecker puts it:
Paul vividly described and/or dramatically enacted the crucifixion of Jesus when he presented his gospel, capturing the imagination of his audience by depicting the crucifixion of Jesus in graphic detail ... He must, at the very least, have held out his arms to dramatize a crucified body for his audience.
https://books.google.com/books?id=DVoiC ... ED&f=false
Nor am I saying that. I think it is self-evident that Paul spoke about the crucifixion.I'm getting a better appreciation for your inquiry though. No one seems to be saying that Paul didn't talk about the crucifixion in Gal. 3:1....
Words move away from their roots all the time....but did he do more than that, and I don't understand Greek enough (or at all) to say. As a novice though, it seems "odd" to think that the word "prographo" doesn't have something to do with writing, but I guess it is related to the word "graphic" so I suppose I can appreciate the sense of a visual depiction.