Announcement

Collapse

Christianity 201 Guidelines

orthodox Christians only.

Discussion on matters of general mainstream evangelical Christian theology that do not fit within Theology 201. Have some spiritual gifts ceased today? Is the KJV the only viable translation for the church today? In what sense are the books of the bible inspired and what are those books? Church government? Modern day prophets and apostles?

This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and Christians. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” or "orthodox" for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Additionally and rarely, there may be some topics or lines of discussion that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine (in general Christian circles or in the TheologyWeb community) or that deny certain core values that are the Christian convictions of forum leadership that may be more appropriately placed within Unorthodox Theology 201. NO personal offense should be taken by such discretionary decision for none is intended. While inerrancy is NOT considered a requirement for posting in this section, a general respect for the Bible text and a respect for the inerrantist position of others is requested.

The Tweb rules apply here like they do everywhere at Tweb, if you haven't read them, now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Galatians 2:11, Peter, and OSAS

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Galatians 2:11, Peter, and OSAS

    Galatians 2:11 in the NRSV reads:

    But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood self-condemned; 12 for until certain people came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But after they came, he drew back and kept himself separate for fear of the circumcision faction.

    Of course, Cephas refers to Peter. Does self-condemned literally refer to damnation? And if so, what do advocates of once saved-always saved make of this? Was Peter not saved until this point (at least 15 years after the resurrection)?
    "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

  • #2
    I don't think even most proponents of conditional security would consider that damnation.
    Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

    Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
    sigpic
    I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

    Comment


    • #3
      The relevant Greek word here is kataginōskō, which Strong's defines as "to find fault with/blame", or "to accuse/condemn". If this sense is accurate, then translations like the NIV that translate it as "condemned" would seem to be unfortunate.

      One might make a case for Peter's actions having salvific implications based on Galatians 1:6-10, but I do not immediately feel confident saying he would have fallen within this category of preaching another gospel.
      Last edited by KingsGambit; 03-31-2015, 03:34 PM. Reason: typo; meant to put "condemned" instead of "NIV"
      "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
        The relevant Greek word here is kataginōskō, which Strong's defines as "to find fault with/blame", or "to accuse/condemn". If this sense is accurate, then translations like the NIV that translate it as "NIV" would seem to be unfortunate.

        One might make a case for Peter's actions having salvific implications based on Galatians 1:6-10, but I do not immediately feel confident saying he would have fallen within this category of preaching another gospel.
        Did you mean to put something else here?
        I DENOUNCE DONALD J. TRUMP AND ALL HIS IMMORAL ACTS.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Zymologist View Post
          Did you mean to put something else here?
          Oops. Yes, I meant "condemned".
          "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
            Galatians 2:11 in the NRSV reads:

            But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood self-condemned; 12 for until certain people came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But after they came, he drew back and kept himself separate for fear of the circumcision faction.

            Of course, Cephas refers to Peter. Does self-condemned literally refer to damnation? And if so, what do advocates of once saved-always saved make of this? Was Peter not saved until this point (at least 15 years after the resurrection)?
            I understand that to mean that Peter was acting wrong or hypocritically. Not every instance of being saved or condemned is in reference to salvation or damnation. For instance, I'd argue that 1 Timothy 2:15 is not in reference to salvation:

            Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.
            "Faith is nothing less than the will to keep one's mind fixed precisely on what reason has discovered to it." - Edward Feser

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
              The relevant Greek word here is kataginōskō, which Strong's defines as "to find fault with/blame", or "to accuse/condemn". If this sense is accurate, then translations like the NIV that translate it as "condemned" would seem to be unfortunate.

              One might make a case for Peter's actions having salvific implications based on Galatians 1:6-10, but I do not immediately feel confident saying he would have fallen within this category of preaching another gospel.
              There are actually two relevant words. The commentary by Andrew Das observes that κατεγνωσμενος ην go together to show that the condemnation was something of the past :"The verb ην is an imperfect, which, with the perfect participle of καταγινώσκω, functions as a pluperfect with the sense of a past existing state. [Das,Galatians, 196 with references in note 3 to Longnecker, Galatians 72; Burton, Galatians, 103; likewise Porter, Verbal Aspect, 469-70, on the pluperfect equivalency: The periphrasis stresses Peter's condition at the time of the confrontation.]

              You can review the condemnation word at: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/...=greek#lexicon

              The Tufts link shows some equivalents as 'despised' or 'foibles' -- However I am not sure if these are properly matched to the word in Gal 2:11. (I basically mean that these definitions show flexibility of use.)

              The NRSV is probably decent here. Paul nor Peter could actually sentence themselves before God as guilty. As such, Paul's statement, himself not being a judge, would suggest a less formal use of these words than if this were a criminal court.

              In the past I tended to see the English word 'condemned' as meaning, in many cases, the idea of 'feeling guilty.' I was wrong to apply this to the reading of scripture, in general. But maybe in this case it is the correct idea.
              Last edited by mikewhitney; 03-31-2015, 05:48 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                If this sense is accurate, then translations like the NIV that translate it as "condemned" would seem to be unfortunate.
                Not at all. It is only unfortunate that certain Christians would have such a narrow view of the semantic range of 'condemn'.

                Comment

                Related Threads

                Collapse

                Topics Statistics Last Post
                Started by Ana Dragule, 11-13-2020, 01:47 AM
                2 responses
                32 views
                1 like
                Last Post seanD
                by seanD
                 
                Started by Thoughtful Monk, 11-11-2020, 03:18 PM
                3 responses
                42 views
                1 like
                Last Post Christian3  
                Started by mossrose, 11-08-2020, 03:50 PM
                1 response
                28 views
                5 likes
                Last Post Sparko
                by Sparko
                 
                Started by Faber, 11-06-2020, 11:51 AM
                1 response
                5 views
                0 likes
                Last Post Faber
                by Faber
                 
                Started by DesertBerean, 11-02-2020, 02:57 PM
                Working...
                X