rgprice "1 Cor 15:5-10 is clearly an interpolation" --- I call BS

[neilgodfrey]

How does one explain that the person who wrote 15:5-10 ("I am the least of the apostles, not deserving to be called an apostle") was the same person who wrote Galatians 2:6 (apostolic status of the big three meant nothing to him)?

[gryan]

How does one explain that the person who wrote 15:5-10 ("I am the least of the apostles, not deserving to be called an apostle") was the same person who wrote Galatians 2:6 (apostolic status of the big three meant nothing to him)?

Re: A tentative working translation of Gal 2:6 where Paul is humble -- "I am the least of the apostles, not deserving to be called an apostle"

Gal 2:6
ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν δοκούντων εἶναί τι,
As for those recognized to be something,

—ὁποῖοί ποτε ἦσαν οὐδέν μοι διαφέρει·
--whatsoever formerly they were in no way my concern

(πρόσωπον ὁ Θεὸς ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνει)—
(God does not lay hold of the outer person)

ἐμοὶ γὰρ οἱ δοκοῦντες οὐδὲν προσανέθεντο,
in no way did the recognized ones consult me.

Interpretation: Paul was there to consult the recognized ones. They did not consult him in any sense, nor did they need to. Thus, judging who they were formerly was not his concern.

Since my translation departs from standard readings of the Greek, I'm struggling with the Greek grammar of the two negations 1) οὐδέν μοι διαφέρει· and 2) ἐμοὶ [/b]γὰρ οἱ δοκοῦντες οὐδὲν προσανέθεντο.

[neilgodfrey]

How does one explain that the person who wrote 15:5-10 ("I am the least of the apostles, not deserving to be called an apostle") was the same person who wrote Galatians 2:6 (apostolic status of the big three meant nothing to him)?

Re: A translation of Gal 2:6 where Paul is humble -- "I am the least of the apostles, not deserving to be called an apostle"

ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν δοκούντων εἶναί τι,
As for those recognized to be something,

—ὁποῖοί ποτε ἦσαν οὐδέν μοι διαφέρει·
--whatsoever formerly they were in no way my concern

(πρόσωπον ὁ Θεὸς ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνει)—
(God does not lay hold of the outer person)

ἐμοὶ γὰρ οἱ δοκοῦντες οὐδὲν προσανέθεντο,
in no way did the recognized ones consult me.

Interpretation: Paul was there to consult the recognized ones. They did not consult him in any sense, nor did they need to. Thus, judging who they were formerly was not his concern.

Except that such a tendentious translation is contrary to the context. Technically and in isolation from the context it is possible but at the cost of finding a meaningful context for the "translation" -- for some reason I am reminded of another poster here from whom I would expect such a decontextualized "transcription" to force an "elimination" of a contradiction like any other good apologist.

[gryan]

How does one explain that the person who wrote 15:5-10 ("I am the least of the apostles, not deserving to be called an apostle") was the same person who wrote Galatians 2:6 (apostolic status of the big three meant nothing to him)?

Re: A translation of Gal 2:6 where Paul is humble -- "I am the least of the apostles, not deserving to be called an apostle"

ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν δοκούντων εἶναί τι,
As for those recognized to be something,

—ὁποῖοί ποτε ἦσαν οὐδέν μοι διαφέρει·
--whatsoever formerly they were in no way my concern

(πρόσωπον ὁ Θεὸς ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνει)—
(God does not lay hold of the outer person)

ἐμοὶ γὰρ οἱ δοκοῦντες οὐδὲν προσανέθεντο,
in no way did the recognized ones consult me.

Interpretation: Paul was there to consult the recognized ones. They did not consult him in any sense, nor did they need to. Thus, judging who they were formerly was not his concern.

Except that such a tendentious translation is contrary to the context. Technically and in isolation from the context it is possible but at the cost of finding a meaningful context for the "translation" -- for some reason I am reminded of another poster here from whom I would expect such a decontextualized "transcription" to force an "elimination" of a contradiction like any other good apologist.

Yes, that is the prevailing view. But I don't get it. Contrary to what context? Contrary to the forthcoming confrontation of Cephas to his face?

I don't think the proposed humble-Paul translation is contrary to the confrontation. Paul was accusing Cephas of hypocrisy. Paul knows that Cephas used to eat with Gentiles, and all he is asking is for Cephas to keep on doing what he had done before, and not be swayed by "some from James [the Lord's brother]."

I disagree with the mainstream construal of context in a lot of ways; but mainly, I differentiate between James the Lord's brother (of Gal 1:19 and 2:12) and James the "recognized pillar" (of Gal 2:9, and 1 Cor 15:7). So in this reading, Paul wants to argue that he and the recognized ones --James/Cephas/John--are basically in unity, having shared the right hand of fellowship. Paul wants Cephas and the Galatian audience to be loyal to him rather than be swayed by the lure of "some from James" [the Lord's brother]. In this way of reading context, Paul is not so much blaming Cephas as shifting blame to "some from James." Paul is pleading for Cephas to return to his pattern of eating with Gentiles.

I know my translation is out of sync with the prevailing mode of interpreting context, but given my way of re-imagining the context, I think it fits.

I'm open to hearing agreement or disagreement, of course.

[neilgodfrey]

Contrary to what context? Contrary to the forthcoming confrontation of Cephas to his face?

you sound too much like mlinssen's twin to bother with

[gryan]

Contrary to what context? Contrary to the forthcoming confrontation of Cephas to his face?

you sound too much like mlinssen's twin to bother with

That makes sense. Better to make your case against the prevailing view rather than spend a lot of time interacting with an alternative interpretation advocated by only one person.

Thanks for your comments. Even though they sting a bit, they ring true.