Comments on: Galatians 2:7 http://versebyversecommentary.com/galatians/galatians-27/ by Dr. Grant C. Richison Thu, 24 May 2012 18:49:14 +0000 hourly 1 By: Grant http://versebyversecommentary.com/galatians/galatians-27/comment-page-1/#comment-1212 Grant Mon, 21 Jan 2008 22:03:56 +0000 http://versebyversecommentary.com/1999/12/30/galatians-27/#comment-1212 Bob, excellent question. I use the New King James Version (because of its excellent translation and I like to use both the critical text and the majority texts) but use the Greek as my study text. The word "for" is a definite article, genitive, singular, feminine. As you noted the word "for" does work well for the genitive case. The Greek article (t?s) is here an objective genitive and does not indicate definition (“?of?”) but direction ("to" or "for"), as in our text and most modern translations. Galatians 1:6-9 with Paul's later rebuke of Peter in this chapter would make no sense if Paul and Peter had different messages. The "pillars" (apostles) recognized that Paul and Peter were given two different but equal tasks. Note A.T. Robertson's comment on this passage: "Perfect passive indicative of ??????? [pisteu?], to intrust, which retains the accusative of the thing (?? ?????????? [to euaggelion]) in the passive voice. This clear-cut agreement between the leaders “denotes a distinction of sphere, and not a difference of type” (Lightfoot). Both divisions in the work preach the same “gospel” (not like 1:6f., the Judaizers). It seems hardly fair to the Three to suggest that they at first championed the cause of the Judaizers in the face of Paul’s strong language in verse 5." Robertson, A. (1997). Word Pictures in the New Testament. Vol.V c1932, Vol.VI c1933 by Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention. (Ga 2:7). Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems. This shows that Peter and Paul did not preach two different gospels, as might be deduced from the KJV, “the gospel of the uncircumcision” and “the gospel of the circumcision.” There was one gospel though it was addressed to two distinct groups of people. The reason the apostles concluded that Paul’s commission was equal to Peter’s was that God gave success to both. This contract was sealed by James, Peter, and John in extending to Paul and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship. This was a sign of agreement and trust and an indication to all present that they endorsed the division of labor whereby the Jerusalem apostles were appointed to evangelize the Jews and Paul was entrusted to carry the gospel to the Gentiles. Note Peter's commendation of Paul's writings in 2 Peter 3:15-17. Bob, excellent question. I use the New King James Version (because of its excellent translation and I like to use both the critical text and the majority texts) but use the Greek as my study text. The word “for” is a definite article, genitive, singular, feminine. As you noted the word “for” does work well for the genitive case. The Greek article (t?s) is here an objective genitive and does not indicate definition (“?of?”) but direction (“to” or “for”), as in our text and most modern translations. Galatians 1:6-9 with Paul’s later rebuke of Peter in this chapter would make no sense if Paul and Peter had different messages. The “pillars” (apostles) recognized that Paul and Peter were given two different but equal tasks. Note A.T. Robertson’s comment on this passage: “Perfect passive indicative of ??????? [pisteu?], to intrust, which retains the accusative of the thing (?? ?????????? [to euaggelion]) in the passive voice. This clear-cut agreement between the leaders “denotes a distinction of sphere, and not a difference of type” (Lightfoot). Both divisions in the work preach the same “gospel” (not like 1:6f., the Judaizers). It seems hardly fair to the Three to suggest that they at first championed the cause of the Judaizers in the face of Paul’s strong language in verse 5.”
Robertson, A. (1997). Word Pictures in the New Testament. Vol.V c1932, Vol.VI c1933 by Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention. (Ga 2:7). Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems.

This shows that Peter and Paul did not preach two different gospels, as might be deduced from the KJV, “the gospel of the uncircumcision” and “the gospel of the circumcision.” There was one gospel though it was addressed to two distinct groups of people. The reason the apostles concluded that Paul’s commission was equal to Peter’s was that God gave success to both. This contract was sealed by James, Peter, and John in extending to Paul and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship. This was a sign of agreement and trust and an indication to all present that they endorsed the division of labor whereby the Jerusalem apostles were appointed to evangelize the Jews and Paul was entrusted to carry the gospel to the Gentiles.

Note Peter’s commendation of Paul’s writings in 2 Peter 3:15-17.

]]> By: Bob Villareal http://versebyversecommentary.com/galatians/galatians-27/comment-page-1/#comment-1208 Bob Villareal Mon, 21 Jan 2008 17:23:08 +0000 http://versebyversecommentary.com/1999/12/30/galatians-27/#comment-1208 What Bible version are you quoting? Is "for" the uncircumcised rather than "to" or "of" the uncircumcised a better translation? The reason I'm asking is that a mid-Acts friend thinks that Peter and Paul preached two entirely different gospels. I think "for" works well for the genitive case. I also think we're only talking about one gospel. What Bible version are you quoting? Is “for” the uncircumcised rather than “to” or “of” the uncircumcised a better translation? The reason I’m asking is that a mid-Acts friend thinks that Peter and Paul preached two entirely different gospels. I think “for” works well for the genitive case. I also think we’re only talking about one gospel.

]]>