Above I was trying to demonstrate that writing was irrelevant in each of the exemplars, as it probably is in Gal 3:1. The significance is that the information was openly presented (proclaimed, announced) to the Galatians, as it was with all my exemplars. (That of course excludes the hope of them having seen Jesus crucified in Galatia.) The only "in the past" is the tense of the verb. The Galatians had received the umm, good news... about the crucifixion.robert j wrote:From another thread about Galatians 3:1 ---Here you characterize the term as referring to something written in the past.spin wrote:Jesus, what a trainwreck this thread seems to be. The o.p. hangs on the misunderstood significance of the verb προγραφω. Look at the word. Can you see γραφω in there? You know, to do with writing (as in "graphology")? "Set down in writing". Even the etymology of "proscribe" hints at the significance.
Paul had apparently sent these Galatians letters that told them of the crucifixion. You saw the letters with your own eyes and heard them read....
There is no notion of having seen Jesus crucified in Galatia, only having seen what had been set down in writing.
While it's certainly possible that this written material was something Paul had written, perhaps part of one of his other letters. However, with Paul's predilection for using the Jewish scriptures to support his positions (such as Galatians 3:13), I think it's more likely that the written material that Paul was referring to in Galatians 3:1 was the scriptures.
As for "predilection" for using Jewish scriptures, I guess that every writer we look at in the NT has such a predilection. There is nothing whatsoever in Gal 3:1 to suggest that Paul was exercising this "predilection".
The problem in Gal 3:1 is to understand the importance of "before (their) eyes", which suggests something other than, or more than, simply reading a text. There was something present for them to see—which I guess is what suggested that they might have seen the crucifixion. The easiest approach to the problem is that they received the evangelism of Paul. He proclaimed the crucifixion, making it real to them. I don't think simple reading cuts it. In fact the following verse would seem to support evangelism by Paul: he implies that they received the spirit by hearing in faith. Paul is describing an event the Galatians were there to witness. The fact that Paul contrasts the way they were first converted (through faith in what was heard) with the works of the law negates the use of Jewish religious texts.
A reference to the Galatians being preached to in Gal 3:1-2 deals both with the seeing and the hearing, an event with caused them to receive the spirit. Now, though, the presence of other preachers—Jewish proselytizers—has made them "lose their reason".