The structures of Gal 2:4 and 2:6
Carl W. Conrad
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu
Tue Apr 23 22:06:27 EDT 2002
At 10:27 AM -0400 4/23/02, Moon-Ryul Jung wrote:
>[Carl]
>>I continue to find it easier to believe that Paul never completed the
>sentence >begun with DIA DE TOUS PAREISAKTOUS YEUDADELFOUS, that he got
>carried away >emotionally
>> by anger at their "espionage", states emphatically that he did not give way
>> to them and why, and then abruptly halts the sentence as if having
>> forgotten what he originally intended to say.
>
>[Moon]
>
>Let me ask two questions.
>
>(1) Is it reasonable to believe that Paul did not review what he wrote.
>He wrote an official letter. How come he did not review it? Even after
>he proof-read it, did he leave it unedited?
Perhaps it would be worth while imagining the process of writing a letter:
do you suppose it was handwritten, typed, proofread, then copied onto a
"fair copy"? I frankly don't think that Galatians reads like a document
that was checked and edited and then copied from papyrus to parchment
before sending. I very much doubt any proofreading or editing by the author.
>(2) If he did not complete the sentence begun with DIA DE TOUS
>PAREISAKTOUS YEUDADELFOUS, would he have meant to say something like
>"There were some
>debate on the issue of Gentile believers' circumcision"?
If we knew for sure what he meant to say, we wouldn't be confronting the
problem that this text presents. Some seem to be pretty sure they know
exactly what Paul intended; I personally think rather that we have to read
a lot between the lines and guess about this letter, knowing very well that
what we're doing is guessing rather than working our way toward firm and
satisfactory conclusions.
--
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University (Emeritus)
Most months:: 1647 Grindstaff Road/Burnsville, NC 28714/(828) 675-4243
cwconrad at artsci.wustl.edu OR cwconrad at ioa.com
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
More information about the B-Greek
mailing list