[B-Greek] Chronology of Ga 2:11-21 (was DOKEIN in Gal 2:6-10)

Donald Cobb docobb at orange.fr
Wed Feb 3 02:31:54 EST 2010


Hello Iver,

A few days ago you wrote this:

< A side comment that has nothing to do with Greek, but a lot to do with 
hortatory discourse: There is nothing in the text that suggests that the 
incident in Gal 2:11-21 happened after the events of Gal 2:1-10, but 
there is much that suggest that it happened before. >

Aside from the DE, which can be taken either way, what exactly is there 
in the text of Gal 2:11-21 that would lead the reader to conclude that 
Paul is writing about a situation previous to Ga 2:1-10? I don't want to 
open a debate on B-Greek if the question hinges only on hermeneutical 
issues (i.e., situating the events Pauls speaks of in Galatians in 
connection with the book of Acts), and if that's the case an off-list 
response would no doubt be more appropriate. But I am curious as to how 
you come to that conclusion. Thanks.

Donald Cobb
Aix-en-Provence, France



Iver Larsen a écrit :
> Just a couple of comments.
>
> I agree that hOI DOKOUNTES refers to the respected and recognized 
> leaders/pillars of the Jerusalem church, and it is likely that it refers 
> specifically to the three apostles: James, Peter and John.
>
> The perceived negative slant may come from the English "seemed to be leaders" as 
> in NIV. This is a mistake carried over more or less from the KJV and the RSV, 
> but a mistake that has been corrected in the TNIV: "those esteemed as leaders" 
> (2:2) , NIV: "As for those who seemed to be important" (2:6), TNIV: "As for 
> those who were held in high esteem". NIV: "those reputed to be pillars" (2:9), 
> TNIV: "those esteemed as pillars".
>
> Paul does comment on the fact that revelation from God takes precedence over 
> estimation by people, but he also recognizes that for many people the opinion of 
> recognized leaders and especially apostles was very important.
>
> A side comment that has nothing to do with Greek, but a lot to do with hortatory 
> discourse: There is nothing in the text that suggests that the incident in Gal 
> 2:11-21 happened after the events of Gal 2:1-10, but there is much that suggest 
> that it happened before. Gal 2:11-21 prepares the way for chapter 3 and is not 
> linked time wise to 2:1-10. The DE in v. 11 does not mean "but", rather it 
> introduces a new paragraph. NIV and TNIV at least got that right. This is an 
> example where Western assumptions of chronology lead to dubious conclusions. I 
> only mention this because Carl stated that assumption in passing.
>
> Iver Larsen
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Carl Conrad" <cwconrad2 at mac.com>
> To: "Mark Lightman" <lightmanmark at yahoo.com>
> Cc: <b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org>
> Sent: 30. januar 2010 21:40
> Subject: Re: [B-Greek] DOKEIN in Gal 2:6-10
>
>
>   
>> On Jan 29, 2010, at 8:14 PM, Mark Lightman wrote:
>>     
>>> <Isn’t there another way to look at these verses? >
>>>
>>> What you have in the three references to the "seemers" is progressively more 
>>> info:  OI DOKOUNTES, OI DOKOUNTES EINAI TI, OI DOKOUNTES EINAI STULOI.  There 
>>> is nothing in the Greek that makes it impossible that the third phrase 
>>> refers to a different group, namely Peter, James, and John, than the first 
>>> two.
>>>       
>> Gal 2:6-9:  6 Ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν δοκούντων εἶναί τι, _ ὁποῖοί ποτε ἦσαν οὐδέν μοι 
>> διαφέρει· πρόσωπον [ὁ] θεὸς ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνει _ ἐμοὶ γὰρ οἱ δοκοῦντες οὐδὲν 
>> προσανέθεντο  7 ἀλλὰ τοὐναντίον ἰδόντες ὅτι πεπίστευμαι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς 
>> ἀκροβυστίας καθὼς Πέτρος τῆς περιτομῆς, ...ι, Ἰάκωβος καὶ Κηφᾶς καὶ Ἰωάννης, 
>> οἱ δοκοῦντες στῦλοι εἶναι, δεξιὰς ἔδωκαν ἐμοὶ καὶ Βαρναβᾷ κοινωνίας, ἵνα ἡμεῖς 
>> εἰς τὰ ἔθνη, αὐτοὶ δὲ εἰς τὴν περιτομήν· [ 6 APO DE TWN DOKOUNTWN EINAI TI, _ 
>> hOPOIOI POTE HSAN OUDEN MOI DIAFEREI· PROSWPON [hO] QEOS ANQRWPOU OU LAMBANEI 
>> _ EMOI GAR hOI DOKOUNTES OUDEN PROSANEQENTO  7 ALLA TOU)NANTION IDONTES hOTI 
>> PEPISTEUMAI TO EUAGGELION THS AKROBUSTIAS KAQWS PETROS THS PERITOMHS,  ... 
>> IAKWBOS KAI KHFAS KAI IWANNHS, hOI DOKOUNTES STULOI EINAI, DEXIAS EDWKAN EMOI 
>> KAI BARNABAi KOINWNIAS, hINA hHMEIS EIS TA EQNH, AUTOI DE EIS THN PERITOMHN]
>>
>> I think that Mark's note cited above hits the nail on the head. Those referred 
>> to by the substantive participial DOKOUNTES in Gal 2:6-9 are Peter, James, and 
>> John; what they did, when consulted by Paul about his missionary work among 
>> Gentiles, according to Paul's explicit statement, was to approve of it without 
>> imposing any additional obligation (οὐδὲν προσανέθεντο [OUDEN PROSANEQENTO]) 
>> and to acknowledge the legitimacy of Paul's mission to Gentiles as parallel to 
>> Peter's mission to Judeans.
>>
>> There really should be no question of equating the DOKOUNTES STULOI with the 
>> YEUDADELFOI of verses 4-5 διὰ δὲ τοὺς παρεισάκτους ψευδαδέλφους, οἵτινες 
>> παρεισῆλθον κατασκοπῆσαι τὴν ἐλευθερίαν ἡμῶν ἣν ἔχομεν ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, ἵνα 
>> ἡμᾶς καταδουλώσουσιν,  5 οἷς οὐδὲ πρὸς ὥραν εἴξαμεν τῇ ὑποταγῇ, ἵνα ἡ ἀλήθεια 
>> τοῦ εὐαγγελίου διαμείνῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς. [DIA DE TOUS PAREISAKTOUS YEUDADELFOUS, 
>> hOITINES PAREISHLQON KATASKOPHSAI THN ELEUQERIAN hHMWN hHN ECOMEN EN CRISTWi 
>> IHSOU, hINA hHMAS KATADOULWSOUSIN,  5 hOIS OUDE PROS hWRAN EIXAMEN THi 
>> hUPOTAGHi, hINA hH ALHQEIA TOU EUAGGELIOU DIAMEINHi PROS hUMAS.] But the 
>> suspicion has lingered on over the years that Paul's usage of the verb DOKEIN 
>> in verses 6-9 somehow hints that Paul was not really comfortable with these 
>> "pillars" of the Jerusalem congregation. That suspicion may be colored by what 
>> Paul recounts of his subsequent argument with Peter in verses 11ff. And I 
>> guess that some may continue to suspect that there's something disparaging in 
>> Paul's usage of this participle DOKOUNTES to refer to them. I think that's a 
>> mistake, and I think it is one that hinges to a considerable extent on a 
>> misunderstanding of the sense of the Greek verb DOKEIN.
>>
>> I think that Louw & Nida have got it right in their entry:
>> "87.42 οἱ δοκοῦντες [hOI DOKOUNTES]: those who have a reputation of being 
>> important or are generally recognized as being important — ‘important persons, 
>> influential persons, prominent persons.’ ἀνεθέμην αὐτοῖς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ὃ 
>> κηρύσσω ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, κατ᾿ ἰδίαν δὲ τοῖς δοκοῦσιν [ANEQEMHN AUTOIS TO 
>> EUAGGELION hO KHRUSSW EN TOIS EQNESIN, KAT᾿ IDIAN DE TOIS DOKOUSIN] ‘in a 
>> private meeting with the prominent persons, I explained to them the gospel 
>> message that I preach to the Gentiles’ Ga 2:2."
>>
>> I think my own preferred gloss for DOKOUNTES in Gal 2:6-9 would be "esteemed" 
>> or "respected." That still leaves open the possibility that the esteem or 
>> respect given to Peter, James, and John is misplaced. I think that Paul is 
>> drawing a careful distinction, when he says that God doesn't play favorites, 
>> between "being respected" and "appointed by God."  Paul is in the somewhat 
>> awkward position of maintaining his conviction of his own divinely-appointed 
>> status (Gal 1:1) while seeking legitimation from the "mother" congregation and 
>> its acknowledged authorities. He gains that legitimation from the "pillars," 
>> but he has not given way to the pressure from the YEUDADELFOI, nor does he 
>> give the impression that the acknowledgment of his status as missionary to 
>> Gentiles is something more than a political agreement with the Jerusalem 
>> community and its "putative" spokespersons.
>>
>> The verb DOKEIN, like several other elusive Greek verbs, calls for careful 
>> study, including examination of the texts cited as evidence for the whole 
>> spectrum of usage cataloged in the lexicon. I'm not going to attempt to draw 
>> up a lexicoraphic catalog of my own, but I do want to call attention to the 
>> fact that its connotations are at least as commonly positive as they are 
>> negative. DOXA may be "glory," or "renown" or "opinion" or "appearance." DOKEI 
>> MOI and DOK(E)W may mean "I think" or "I deem" or "I judge." EDOXEN hHMIN 
>> ordinarily means "we have decided" -- in which case the "decision" is a DOGMA. 
>> What makes the verb DOKEIN difficult and elusive is that there seems always to 
>> be a subjective element in it: there's no guarantee of its ALHQEIA or absence 
>> of any concealment. Was it Dickens who spoke of "the bubble reputation"?
>>
>> Carl W. Conrad
>> Department of Classics, Washington University (Retired)
>>     
>
> ---
> B-Greek home page: http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek
> B-Greek mailing list
> B-Greek at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-greek
>   



More information about the B-Greek mailing list