ECT 'Euangelizo' is not even a grammatical question in Galatians--or anywhere.
- Thread starter Interplanner
- Start date
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
The Greek word euaggelion used at Galatians 2:7 is a "noun" and not a "verb."
Depends on which supposed Bible Believer and or supposed Madist you ask :chuckle:
Interplanner
Well-known member
True, but if 2 were in mind he would be indefinite: 'a gospel to...' and 'another to...' There is not. So 1:16 is the verb with the built-in object and the additional 'about Him' (sounds like one to me!). And in 2:5 there is one gospel, after speaking about preaching (kerusso not euangelizo because the one gospel was mentioned) in v2.
The 'spies' he was worried about were attacking the one gospel. He was not validating two gospels and concerned about spies on two.
'Spies' would have had a field day pitting one group against the other. MAD is muck and fraud on this.
Jerry:
my original comment was about 'euangelizo' in which the direct object is 'built-in'. (Danoh realizes, for ex., that a person might as well trans it 'gospeling' because the noun is just being a verb.) The variety of expression in Gal 1-2 support this being about one gospel, not two.
Last edited:
Again, on my end I see no problem with understanding the passage as referring to one gospel.
Both Peter and Paul had preached "the gospel of Christ."
That is not the difference.
Rather, Peter had preached Him as PROPHESIED "unto His own."
In contrast, Paul, had preached THAT aspect - BUT ALSO according to the revelation of The MYSTERY.
Paul mentions BOTH as Romans opens, and again, in Romans 15.
Peter preached Him as Prophesied.
Whereas Paul preached said Prophesied Christ (David's rightful heir) he asserts He preached Him according to the Revelation of the Mystery His Prophesied Resurrection had made the Revelation of possible.
"Remember that Jesus Christ, of the seed of David (that aspect of His resurrection what had been Prophesied about and preached by the Twelve, concerns itself with), was raised from the dead, according to my gospel" (that aspect of His resurrection that made possible that content The Mystery concerns itself with).
Interplanner
Well-known member
to Tam:
that's now how it works in Greek. There are cases and they have their own spellings. the issue does not hinge on an English translation.
The message will be the same in any language.
To be blunt, one does not even have to know how to read at all, or have a bible at all (in any language), to know of GOD.
Romans 1:20 KJV
(20) For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Psalms 19:1-3 KJV
(1) To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David. The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.
(2) Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge.
(3) There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard.
Job 12:7-8 KJV
(7) But ask now the beasts, and they shall teach thee; and the fowls of the air, and they shall tell thee:
(8) Or speak to the earth, and it shall teach thee: and the fishes of the sea shall declare unto thee.
Interplanner
Well-known member
but we were talking about a very particular historical-grammatical question. You would want the most original wording, not one from 1500 years and 5000 miles removed.
To the moron:
"Of" denotes possession in any language.
kingdom OF God
children OF the devil
Joseph the husband OF Mary
root OF the tree
wood OF God
kingdoms OF the world
pinnacle OF the temple
borders OF Zabulon and Nephthalim
fishers OF men
multitudes OF people from Galilee
salt OF the earth
your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness OF the scribes and Pharisees
a servant OF Jesus Christ
beloved OF God
the father OF us all
Is a little light coming on yet?
And just what is your criteria for "the most original"?????
The oldest manuscripts we have?
The copies read the most?
The copies this group liked the most, but other groups liked others the most?
We don't have any indication that folks like Seth, Enoch, Noah, Abraham had any written originals or copies to read up on. And yet they knew GOD.
It is why mankind can be called sheep, sons, trees, bride, slaves, etc.
Because it is not the words themselves, but the MESSAGE being conveyed by using those many different terms that, by themselves, have completely different meanings; and yet they all convey the same MESSAGE of a relationship.
You're off.
There is more than one sense for of - another of which is found, say in "the fear of (towards) God" - "the love of money," etc.
Interplanner
Well-known member
OK, but the science of establishing the wording is not that hard to follow. While there aren't originals, the best sets of copies are titled:
Aleph
A
B
D
p46 (papyrus)
The translations usually go with the majority of these 5. None of the variations are major, unless it is the end of Mark or the last line of the 'woman taken in adultery.' But there are some variations because there was hand copying going on.
In a Greek new testament, the variations are all footnoted, and you can go see what the top 5 said plus many other later or minor copies.
Or you are.
That fear belongs to the LORD, it is His terror that you should be wary of.
And that love belongs to money, and not to something else; that's why it says "of money" and not "of something else".
One needs that roadmap (criteria) of that "science" to even begin to establish which is "better".
Again, what is the criteria you are relying on to accept this as fact?
Because what was considered "best" at one time is often later revised.
If you want to state those are the best, that is your prerogative.
But it does not PROVE they are the best.
It's basically just another educated guess by you and anyone else that looked at them.
It's about as productive as trying to choose the "best" scholars, and thinking that just because you consider them the "best" then they must be the one's to listen to for scriptural understanding.
You do see the flaw in that, don't you?
Paul tells us to study the scriptures YOURSELF.
Paul does not tell us to run around and try to find the best scholar to study it for us.
You can listen to them all (including Paul), but until you study the scriptures YOURSELF, you will have no idea if what they are telling you is the truth.
I have no qualms about folks interested in leaning Greek or Hebrew.
I did.
But you won't ever hear me say that the Greek language or the Hebrew language interprets scripture.
Scripture interprets scripture, not any particular language.
If you say so :doh:
Atta boy!
Interplanner
Well-known member
the 'top five' are known as such because of the total integrity of the collection of docs. In each of them is all of the 27 NT accounts and letters. That is taken as a better indicator than a great copy of only Paul's letters, or only the non-Paul letters, or what ever sub group it happens to be. As I recall, one good collection has everything but the Rev. Another does not have James and Hebrews.
The collections match lists of docs made by church fathers in the first 3 centuries.
as for the particular language, you can't use Hebrew rules or English rules when it gets down to Greek details. But all languages will diagram the same.
In Gal 2, the target groups were Indirect Objects; the Gospel was the object. It is one. The Greek case system makes that clear.
The word "gospel" and phrase "the gospel" as mentioned in Galatians...
Galatians 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
Galatians 1:7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
Galatians 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
Galatians 1:11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
Galatians 2:2 And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain.
Galatians 2:5 To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.
Galatians 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;
Galatians 2:14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?
Galatians 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
Galatians 4:13 Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the gospel unto you at the first.
What was this gospel that 1:7 refers to as "the gospel of Christ"?
Galatians 3:1 says it is "Christ crucified among you..." - "O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?"
Paul also asserts that he had reminded Peter that said gospel's Grace applied to both himself and Peter...
Galatians 2:15 We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. 2:17 But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.
In other words, it is the Grace of God - the righteousness of God without the Law - via His Son's Cross...
Galatians 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.
Looks to me like one gospel of Christ.
At least as far as this "justified by the faith of Christ" aspect of "the gospel of Christ" is concerned.
Or as Paul had reminded his fellow Jew: Peter - "We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified."