Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: THi ELEUQERIAi in Gal 5:1

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Richard Fellows <rfellows AT intergate.bc.ca>
  • To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: THi ELEUQERIAi in Gal 5:1
  • Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 08:46:50 -0700


Carlton L. Winbery wrote:

>The problem is not how Jews see Timothy, but in the fact that Luke says
>Paul had Timothy circumcised. Now Acts is certainly a secondary resource
>and Luke (or someone else) may be wrong, but I think he's right. Paul's
>whole argument falls apart in Galatians 2 if in fact Paul allowed Titus to
>be circumcised. He may have, but I am not convinced that he did. That's the
>major problem for the identification of Titus = Timothy (along with what
>seems to me to be a misreading of 1 Cor.).

Could you explain why you think Paul's argument would fall apart if Titus
was circumcised?

I think Titus was eventually circumcised, but not in Jerusalem and not at
the request of the church leaders there nor as an act of concession to the
false brothers. You are right that Paul's argument would fall apart if we
were to read Gal 2:3-5 as Paul saying that he 'allowed' Titus to be
circumcised. The word 'allowed' that you used implies a giving way on
Paul's part. Paul DID circumcise Timothy and that circumcision had been
misunderstood (see Gal 5:11). It is natural for him to explain that it in
no way indicated that he had conceded the principle, and that it had not
been in obedience to orders from the Jerusalem leaders.

Please explain how the Titus-Timothy hypothesis, as I have formulated it,
involves a misreading of 1 Cor.

Regards,

Richard Fellows
Vancouver
rfellows AT intergate.bc.ca





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page