My title pretty much sums up the story. He looks at the structure of these verses in light of the problem in Galatia. In light of what has been discussed lately with regard to James and the circumcision party I note this statement “Note also that the James Gang are recharacterized as ‘the circumcision,’ further confirming that the Jew/Gentile distinction is the crux of the matter.”
We finally come to ἀλλά in v. 14, which Levinsohn, Brannan and I understand to introduce something the [sic] corrects or replaces some proposition from the preceding context. The question is, what is it? From my view, the proposition that is corrected is v. 12, essentially hanging out with the Gentiles, then deciding it was wrong when distinguished guests arrived. One could argue that v. 13 should be included in the “proposition to be corrected,” but I view it as being an ancillary result of the core issue with Peter. Had he not withdrawn, there is a good chance the others (EVEN Barnabas!) would not have withdrawn either.
Brannan is Ric Brannan, also of Logos Bible Software, who has written extensively on the use of ἀλλά. Head on over for the rest of the post.
Biblica has posted its latest issue and it includes an article on Galatians. I see that they have changed their presentation to graphics which preserves the formatting but prevents searching. I’m kind of surprised that they don’t just give us pdf files but I suppose they are trying to prevent them from being widely distributed.
Debbie Hunn, “Pleasing God or Pleasing People? Defending the Gospel in Galatians 1–2.” Biblica. 91:1 (2010): 24-49.
Rob Bradshaw has now posted BibSac volumes 11-20 and included is:
Haratio Balch Hackett, “Remarks on Renderings of the Common Version (In the Epistle to the Galatians).” Bibliotheca Sacra 19:73 (1862): 211-225.
You might also find this article on Paul interesting:
George P. Fisher, “The Apostle Paul, a Witness for the Resurrection of Jesus,” Bibliotheca Sacra. 17:67 (1860): 620-634.
Peter Spitaler, of Villanova University, will present at the SBL International meeting in July on, “‘Biblical Greek’ in Galatians 2:21? The Dubious Case of δωρεάν.” You can read the abstract over on the SBL website.
HT and HT
The latest issue of JBL has the following article:
Robert E. Van Voorst, “Why Is There No Thanksgiving Period in Galatians? An Assessment of an Exegetical Commonplace.” Journal of Biblical Literature. 129:1 (2010): 153-172.
Steve Runge of Logos Bible Software uses Galatians 3:7 as an example to show “how discourse considerations can inform text-critical judgments.”
The two options available to textual critics are:
NA27: γινώσκετε ἄρα ὅτι οἱ ἐκ πίστεως, οὗτοι υἱοί εἰσιν Ἀβραάμ.
Alternate: γινώσκετε ἄρα ὅτι οἱ ἐκ πίστεως, οὗτοι εἰσιν υἱοί Ἀβραάμ.
I’ll let you surf over to read his reasoning but here is his conclusion:
If anything, it provides more support for the NA27 reading since it is the dis-preferred reading, the one more likely to have been corrected by a later hand (as appears to be the case from Sinaiticus). However it illustrates what is at stake in such decisions. It is not just a matter of one little word inconsequentially being swapped with another. Such changes can radically alter our understanding of where Paul was pounding the pulpit.
Stephen Carlson has also weighed in on the issue.
Review of Biblical Literature has posted Kevin McCruden’s review of
Michael Bachmann, Anti-Judaism in Galatians?: Exegetical Studies on a Polemical Letter and on Paul’s Theology. Translated by Robert Brawley. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008 pp. xiii + 234. $45.00. 0802862918, 9780802862914.