DCHindley wrote: ↑Sun Jan 24, 2021 12:06 pm
Like you, I am an amateur who knows enough Greek to be dangerous. My knowledge has always been on the rudimentary side, maybe yours is fresher or just better.
DCHindley: I was unable to edit your pdf, but I did go over the document another time, and I'm satisfied that that is my best as of now.
In seminary, MATS '91, I was an average student of the Greek language. I never attempted to "sight read", and have always been limited to study helps of various kinds. But I had some excellent teachers, most notably I was in an advanced seminar on exegesis of 1 Peter with Paul Achtemeier at Union in Virginia during a time when he was president of SBL and working on a 1 Peter commentary for hermeneia.
So far, nobody has asked me about my scholarly sources. In case it helps, here is an overview:
Scholarly sources for this study and methods
On Translation
The translation of the texts from Hebrews is based mainly on that of James Swetnam, SJ, from his book,
Hebrews: An Interpretation (2016). His background in the study of Paul’s writings (His dissertation, Jesus and Isaac: A Study of the Epistle to the Hebrews in the Light of the Aqedah, was written under the supervision of Morna Hooker.), and his many previously published close readings of exegetical cruxes in Hebrews makes his little commentary on the structure of Hebrews a very illuminating culmination of his life work.
“Faith of Christ”
There is nothing original in my reading of the grammar of Galatians 2:20 or in my seeing an echo of "the faith of Christ" in Hebrews. The modern pioneer of this reading is Richard Hays and this text was one of a number of texts in the faith of Christ debate. As a result of the debate the scholarly consensus has (arguably) shifted toward reading Galatians 2:20 as a reference to the faithfulness of God’s son.
On the influence of Galatians on Hebrews
On reading Hebrews as a reception of Galatians, Ben Witherington provided the model with his article, “The influence of Galatians on Hebrews.” In it, he offered a series of parallels, large and small, which provided convincing evidence that the anonymous author of the book of Hebrews had read Galatians and was profoundly influenced by it. Witherington went on to argue that the image of Jesus as faith’s pioneer and perfecter was a kind of first century commentary on Paul’s grammatically ambiguous faith of Christ statements, thus providing evidence in favor of Hays’ reading of the grammar. What is original to this thesis is how extend this model.
“Being made perfect”
The argument for Galatians 3:3 is my own. As far as I know, there is no published precedent for it, modern or ancient. This strikes me as odd, because the possibility was so easy to see in light of a participationist reading of 2:20 (the life I now live in the flesh, in the faith I live…”) and in light of Paul’s call to imitate in 4:12 (“Become as I” Cf. Cor. 11:1 “Become imitators of me, as I also Christ”).
Deflecting blame
In the context of the overall tone of the letter, it was helpful to realize Paul’s anger was not directed toward the “brothers.” His strategy was to win them back through encouraging words, all the while focusing his harsh language on the influencers. A rereading of the grammar of Galatians 1:6-7 provided by Troy Martin was useful in this discernment:
“If there are
not some who are troubling you and desiring to pervert the gospel of Christ, I am surprised [at you] because you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ for a different gospel, which is not another.” (Gal. 1:6-7)
The logic of this conditional sentence implies that there are indeed some who are troubling the Galatians and, therefore, Paul is not surprised at the desertion of the “brothers”. Rather, understands it and shifts the blame to the agitators.
“Your temptation”
I doubt that I would ever have come to this reading of the grammar without having first read an article on Galatians 4:13-14 by Troy Martin. Martin argues with great precision and depth that Paul was saying that he had “preached the Gospel” not because of his own “fleshly weakness” (presumed to be a bodily illness or injury), but because of his audience’s “weakness of the flesh.” When the missing pronoun is understood as “your” the whole prepositional phrase is paralleled in Romans where Paul wrote unambiguously about his audience’s condition as the occasioning cause for his words spoken to them: “I speak in human terms because of your fleshly weakness.” Martin also did a service by citing a precedent for this reading in Jerome’s Commentary of Galatians. As a result, I got into Jerome as never before. Jerome and Troy Martin have this in common: even when their exegesis is "wrong", it is worth pondering. As for the rest of Galatians 4:12-15, I was impressed by the way Martin took it apart, but not at all convinced by his way of putting it back together. I spent a long time considering all possible construals of the phrase “your temptation in my flesh.” In the process, I have consulted a number of scholars with a specialty in Greek New Testament, and they have found my rereadings at least “coherent” and at best “good” (none have expressed any interest in endorsing my rereadings publicly as yet).
“Called Brothers”
It was again Troy Martin who introduced the idea that in Galatians 5:13 αδελφοί is probably a nominative of description rather than the vocative of direct address. Having been immersed in parallels between Galatians and Hebrews, the language of being “called brothers” immediately clicked.
“We see Jesus”
As a student of the life of St. Francis, I had long been intrigued by Paul’s statement, “I bear the stigmata of Jesus in my body.” I had also found the statement in Hebrews striking: “But we do gaze on the one who for a time was made lower than the angels, Jesus...” However, I had never considered them together before this project. When I was pondering the phrase, “your temptation in my flesh” (Gal. 4:14) I was encouraged by the Galatian receptivity. If they could receive the apostle “as Christ Jesus” maybe I could also somehow “see Jesus” manifested Paul’s “flesh” statement. My study of Jerome and his predecessor, Victorinus led me to doubt the conventional interpretations. If Paul had wanted to say what he is usually presumed to have said–that his own “flesh” had put the Galatians “to the test”–would he have used those words in that extremely odd grammatical construal? Rather than settle for the conventional construal, I did a kind of lectio divina in the Greek. I meditated on the phrase τὸν πειρασμὸν ὑμῶν ἐν τῇ σαρκί μου as devotion to Christ, and as scholarly inquiry. I did it long enough that I quit caring about the conventional readings, and letting go of forced coherence, kept pressing on toward genuine grammatical coherence.
The resultant echo in Hebrews was problematic. Did the author of Hebrews really get his idea of Jesus being tempted in all ways like us in connection with his reading of Paul’s enigmatic claims in Galatians 4:12-14? After much reflection, I see how it indeed could have been so. The key was to take the leap of contemplatively “seeing” the “flesh” of Jesus manifested in breaking down the dividing wall between so called “Gentile flesh” and “Jewish flesh” (Eph. 2:3, 11 and 15) through “power in weakness”. Very early on, Paul’s writings were read as scripture, albeit difficult to understand (2 Peter 3:16). Through reading Galatians as scripture (with the proposed grammar), focusing on the image of Jesus, I have become convinced I am in the company of another ancient reader--the author of Hebrews, who paid close attention to Paul as one of “those who heard” the Lord (Heb. 3:2).
Hope this helps you understand what I'm up to here!