Galatians 1:1-2

[MrMacSon]

I find the English versions of Galatians1:1 ambiguous

ESV:
Paul, an apostle—not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised 'him' from the dead— 2 and all the brothers who are with me

It would be interesting to see the original Greek interpreted.

Other aspects of Galatians 1 are also interesting, especially Gal 1:12 and Gal 1:15

ESV:
11 For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man's gospel.[c] 12 For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. 13 For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it. 14 And I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my fathers. 15 But when he who had set me apart before I was born[in Gk:' set me apart from my mother's womb'] and who called me by his grace, 16 was pleased to reveal his Son to[in!] me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone[with flesh and blood]; 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.

& Gal 1:16 "was pleased to reveal his Son in me" (ie. "in" in Greek)

The KJV is here https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?s ... ersion=KJV
.

[Peter Kirby]

I find the English versions of Galatians1:1 ambiguous

ESV:
Paul, an apostle—not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead— 2 and all the brothers who are with me

It would be interesting to see the original Greek interpreted.

What ambiguity in particular do you detect?

(My initial reaction is that any 'ambiguity' you are finding in the English might be similarly found 'in the Greek' without it being an actual, real ambiguity in an absolute sense--i.e., it may be somewhat stretched in either case, English or Greek, and for non-grammatical reasons.)

One piece of data: the word "apostle" roughly means "emissary," "a person sent on a special mission, usually as a diplomatic representative." Does that help?

[MrMacSon]

Galatians1:1 (ESV):

Paul, an apostle—not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead— 2 and all the brothers who are with me

(1) "not from men", (2) "nor through man", and (3) "raised 'him' from the dead" - I think the 'him' could equally refer to Paul as to Jesus

[Peter Kirby]

(3) "raised 'him' from the dead" - I think the 'him' could equally refer to Paul as to Jesus

The word for 'him' is a third person pronoun. Greek, just like English, also has first person pronouns, and the implied author of the epistle ('Paul') clearly employs the first person pronoun in that very same sentence ('all the brothers who are with me'). Such an interpretation would be awkward and implausible.

ἐγείραντος αὐτὸν - 'having raised him'
σὺν ἐμοὶ - 'with me'

http://biblehub.com/interlinear/galatians/1-1.htm
http://biblehub.com/interlinear/galatians/1-2.htm

[Peter Kirby]

Galatians1:1 (ESV):

Paul, an apostle—not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead— 2 and all the brothers who are with me

(1) "not from men", (2) "nor through man"

This phrase ("not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead") most evidently refers to what manner of 'apostle' ('messenger', 'emissary', 'ambassador') Paul is: specifically, who/what it is that has made him a messenger / emissary / ambassador:

not from men - οὐκ ἀπ’ ἀνθρώπων
not through men - οὐδὲ δι’ ἀνθρώπου
but through Jesus Christ - ἀλλὰ διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ
and God the Father - καὶ Θεοῦ Πατρὸς

Information about the Greek can easily be glossed at Perseus:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... atians+1.1

This is the entry on ἀπόστολος:

A. [select] messenger, ambassador, envoy, “ὁ μὲν δὴ ἀ. ἐς τὴν Μίλητον ἦν” Hdt.1.21; ἐς Λακεδαίμονα τριήρεϊ ἀ. ἐγίνετο he went off on a mission to Laced., Id.5.38.
b. [select] commander of a naval force, Hsch.
2. [select] messenger from God, LXX 3 Ki.14.6; esp. of the Apostles, Ev.Matt.10.2, al.
II. [select] = στόλος, naval squadron or expedition, Lys.19.21; ἀπόστολον ἀφιέναι, ἀποστέλλειν, ποιεῖσθαι, D.3.5, 18.80,107, IG2.809b190.
2. [select] colony, D.H.9.59.
3. [select] = ἀποστολή, of envoys, J.AJ17.11.1.
4. [select] ἀπόστολον, τό, with or without πλοῖον, packet, Pl.Ep.346a, Ps.-Hdt.Vit.Hom.19.
5. [select] ἀπόστολος, ὁ, order for dispatch, of a vessel, CPHerm.6.11 (iii A.D., pl.), PAmh. 2.138.10(iv A.D.), cf. Dig.49.6.1.
6. [select] export-licence, PGnom.162 (ii A.D.).
7. [select] gen. dub., cargo dispatched by order, POxy.522.1,al. (ii A.D.), PTeb.486 (ii/iii A.D.).

[John2]

MrMacSon,

I would add to Peter's response 1 Cor. 15:35-36:

"But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?” How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies."

[MrMacSon]

The word for 'him' is a third person pronoun. Greek, just like English, also has first person pronouns, and the implied author of the epistle ('Paul') clearly employs the first person pronoun in that very same sentence ('all the brothers who are with me'). Such an interpretation would be awkward and implausible.

ἐγείραντος αὐτὸν - 'having raised him'
σὺν ἐμοὶ - 'with me'

http://biblehub.com/interlinear/galatians/1-1.htm
http://biblehub.com/interlinear/galatians/1-2.htm

except "Paul, an apostle—not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead" has no first person pronouns in it, suggesting that passage is at odds with "and all the brothers who are with me"

I think there's different inflections and that's significant.

[Peter Kirby]

except "Paul, an apostle—not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead" has no first person pronouns in it, suggesting that passage is at odds with "and all the brothers whoa re with me"

I think there's different inflections and that's significant.

That doesn't make any sense.

[Peter Kirby]

That's not even touching the fact that even if an ambiguity were there about who was raised (and it isn't), such an ambiguity (which is not there) would resolve in favor of seeing "Jesus" as the one being raised, on the basis of the context (of these epistles), where "Jesus" is often said to have been raised from the dead. (That is, even if the point made any sense to begin with... which, unfortunately, it does not...)

[Peter Kirby]

Other aspects of Galatians 1 are also interesting, especially Gal 1:12 and Gal 1:15

ESV:
11 For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man's gospel.[c] 12 For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. 13 For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it. 14 And I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my fathers. 15 But when he who had set me apart before I was born[in Gk:' set me apart from my mother's womb'] and who called me by his grace, 16 was pleased to reveal his Son to[in!] me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone[with flesh and blood]; 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.

& Gal 1:16 "was pleased to reveal his Son in me" (ie. "in" in Greek)

There's a relevant recent post on how a 'little knowledge is a dangerous thing' (which this easily might just be a case of)...

Either do English exegesis or Greek exegesis (June 8, 2015 by Matthew R. Malcolm)
https://cryptotheology.wordpress.com/20 ... -exegesis/

Of course, you can do it in other languages too! – But what I mean is that it’s best to either do Greek exegesis properly (i.e. sticking in the Greek text), or else English exegesis properly (i.e. using English translations), than to do English exegesis + ‘deeper’ insights from Logos.

I’ll be teaching Greek exegesis of 1 Cor and English exegesis of 1 Cor next semester (as separate classes), and so I’ve been thinking a bit about this. I’ve had students in the past who have tried to do English exegesis + insights on the ‘deeper’ significance of the words, by hovering their cursor over each word of the Greek text in their Bible software. Given that these are people who haven’t successfully studied, or kept up, their Greek, this invariably results in misunderstanding. For example, on one occasion, a student based a key point of their exegesis on the significance of a particular preposition, which ‘all of the commentators missed’… the only problem was that the student had not recognised that in context, this preposition could not mean what they thought it meant. Logos had offered a series of standard possible glosses for the preposition, from which the student had chosen their favourite. But if you don’t understand the language, you won’t understand how the words actually function in relation to each other.

Better to trust that there are a number of good English translations, and to work from the text as they present it. There’s a lot of scope for good analysis of a translated text. Of course, you can still consider the insights from commentators who comment on the Greek text, but my opinion is that those doing English exegesis should be confident that it is possible to do English exegesis well (despite a few shortcomings), and those doing Greek exegesis should work directly with the Greek text, rather than translating it and then working from their translation.

This is going to be a source of problems for altering a translation here or there to "improve" it on the basis of a less-than-reliable understanding of Greek.