Which is the evidence that the Pillars believed in a Crucified Christ?

[Giuseppe]

There is simply no evidence.

[toejam]

The subtext of Galatians 2

[toejam]

Galatians 2:19-21:
"For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. I do not nullify the grace of God; for if justification comes through the law, then Christ died for nothing."

The implication here is that other Christians (including the Pillars mentioned a few verses earlier) believe in a crucified Jesus with Paul. The disagreement is over the relationship between 'faith' and 'the law' and how that works for one's salvation - *not* whether Jesus was crucified or not. That seems to be a given.

[Giuseppe]

But it is just Galatians 5:11-12 that has made me doubt:

Brothers and sisters, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been abolished. As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!

A: to preach circumcision

B: to be persecuted (by the Pillars and the followers of the Pillars)

C: the cross is a scandal.


According to the same logic of Paul's argument:

If A then NOT B AND NOT C.
But B continues to be TRUE, even if A is TRUE.
Therefore also C continues to be TRUE (for the Pillars).

So the Pillars realized that the only possible meaning of the Crucified Christ is uniquely the abolition of the Jewish Law. Only so it is explained their obstinate opposition to Paul, even to a Paul disposed to concede still the observance of the circumcision.

[Giuseppe]

toejam writes:

The implication here is that other Christians (including the Pillars mentioned a few verses earlier) believe in a crucified Jesus with Paul.

yes but these are "other Christians" made Christians by Paul himself: the same Galatians he is addressing by that epistle. If they practice the circumcision, then it is vain for them to believe still to the crucifixion. This doesn't refer to Pillars. Whereas the Pillars are clearly referred in Gal 5:11-12.

[MrMacSon]

toejam writes:

The implication here is that other Christians (including the Pillars mentioned a few verses earlier) believe in a crucified Jesus with Paul.

yes but these are "other Christians" made Christians by Paul himself: the same Galatians he is addressing by that epistle. If they practice the circumcision, then it is vain for them to believe still to the crucifixion. This doesn't refer to Pillars. Whereas the Pillars are clearly referred in Gal 5:11-12.

Also, Galatians 2 doesn't say what 'the Pillars' believed, and refers to James, Cephas, and John as 'seemed' or 'deemed' ^{ESV, NIV} to be Pillars

.
Gal 2 (nkjv)

7 But on the contrary¹ when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised² had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter 8 (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the³ circumcised⁴ also⁵ worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles), 9 and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be⁶ pillars, perceived⁷ the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship⁸, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. 10 They desired only that we should remember the poor⁹, the very thing which I also was eager to do.

https://www.bible.com/en-GB/bible/114/GAL.2.nkjv

1. Acts 9:15; 13:46; 22:21; Rom. 11:13
2. 1 Cor. 9:17; 1 Thess. 2:4; 1 Tim. 1:11
3. 1 Pet. 1:1
4. Acts 9:15
5. (Gal. 3:5)
6. Matt. 16:18
   • 18 "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and^a on this rock I will build My church, and^b the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. 19 ^cAnd I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”
     
     1. Acts 2:41; (Eph. 2:20; Rev. 21:14)
     2. Job 33:17; Ps. 9:13; 107:18; Is. 38:10
     3. Matt. 18:18; John 20:23
     [whether saying Peter/Cephas is a rock in one of the synoptics makes him 'a Pillar' is another matter, too]
7. Rom. 1:5
8. Acts 13:3
9. Acts 11:30

Moreover, there is the discrepancy of Peter being a hypocrite and "fearing those who were of the circumcision" -

Gal 2 (nkjv)
11 Now when Peter [Cephas] had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; 12 for, before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. 13 And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy.

14 But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, “If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you [how can you] compel Gentiles to live as Jews? 15 We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, 16 knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.

17 “But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is Christ therefore a minister of sin? Certainly not! 18 For if I build again those things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. 19 For I through the law died to the law that I might live to God ...

eta -

In Gal 2:11-13 There seems to have been an interesting dynamic between Peter [and some other Jews] and men who came from James.

Then, in v. 14, there is commentary about Jews living as Gentiles compelling Gentiles to live as Jews. Yet then, in v. 16, "a man is not justified by the works of the law", denying Judaism, then, "but by faith in Jesus Christ".

Also in v. 16, "we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified"

[discipleoftruth]

Please pardon the intrusion of this new visitor.

Perhaps 1 Peter 2: 18 - 24 is the answer you're looking for ?

Keep in mind that Cephas is also Peter.

Resurrection and Crucifixion are main tenets of Christianity, hence most denominations, sects or cults all over the world calling themselves Christian would also claim a belief in those two. What I am trying to say is, if the Pillars didn't believe in a crucified Christ, wouldn't there be major groups claiming that Christ was not crucified ?

[Giuseppe]

Welcome.

The authenticity of 1 Peter is disputed (even if not by minimal mythicism).

If the Pillars didn't believe in a crucified Christ, wouldn't there be major groups claiming that Christ was not crucified ?

they were there but they were surely not followers of the Pillars (I allude to the docetic Christians battled by Ignatius).

[moses]

What I am trying to say is, if the Pillars didn't believe in a crucified Christ, wouldn't there be major groups claiming that Christ was not crucified ?

are you implying there were some groups(not major) who did believe christ wasn't crucified?

[MrMacSon]

In Galatians 2:11-13 There seems to have been an interesting dynamic between Peter [and some other Jews] and 'men who came from James'.

Then, in v. 14, there is commentary about Jews living as Gentiles compelling Gentiles to live as Jews. Yet then, in v. 16, "a man is not justified by the works of the law", seemingly denying Judaism, then, "but [justified] by faith in Jesus Christ".

Also in v. 16, "we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified"

Flesh could not be 'justified' in Judaism: a point of difference.