ECT 'Euangelizo' is not even a grammatical question in Galatians--or anywhere.

I

Interplanner

Well-known member
The case for one gospel is actually simpler than diagramming the whole sentence of Gal 2 about a gospel for circs and uncircs. Find a good lexicon on 'euangelizo'. To make a great announcement. There are a few times when another object is provided, for ex., to announce the birth of a child. As you may know, the 'eu-' part is 'nice, great, best ever' while 'angelizo' is 'announce, declare.' Angels are 'announcers, messengers.' You can see the Greek root for the English.

When it is by itself, it is strictly about the one Gospel.

Now review the situation. Both Peter and Paul were send to 'euangelizo'--to preach the one Gospel TO the two groups. But not only that, Paul had just blasted the Judaistic deception called a gospel that was not. So he and Peter are TOGETHER on task while the opposing one was by the Judaizers and, where Paul worked, assaulting the Galatian people.

There is no sense at all that he is talking about two equal but distinct positive ones for the two groups, grammatically or situationally. Like most of 2P2P, it is a waste of time as far as how it is put together. Ignoring sense, context, reason and the NT.

Greek is more clear than english because of declension. Declension of words means that there are spellings that distinguish:
SUBJECT
OBJECT OF PREOPOSITION
DIRECT OBJECT
INDIRECT OBJECT

Each has a separate spelling or marking. When you get Greek tools, one of them should be an exegetical lexicon because it is simply an official list of the case of each usage. The other kind of lexicon is literary--the actual examples from all kinds of literature of the meaning(s), and thicker the same way that the Oxford dictionary is thicker due to all the literary examples.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
SaulToPaul said:
How is it that you know more about ancient Greek than you do about English?
Click to expand...


I wouldn't trust your assessment anyway. You can't talk about topics. you only talk about how you can put people down. See the OP. When you say something about it, I'll be back.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Dear IP Genius,

If these are the same gospel to two different audiences, why did Paul IMMEDIATELY break the agreement made in Acts 15?
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Dear IP Genius,

Does the gospel of circumcision include those whose circumcision was made uncircumcision? Rom 2:25 (KJV)

If so, why then aren't they under the gospel of uncircumcision?
 
D

DAN P

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
The case for one gospel is actually simpler than diagramming the whole sentence of Gal 2 about a gospel for circs and uncircs. Find a good lexicon on 'euangelizo'. To make a great announcement. There are a few times when another object is provided, for ex., to announce the birth of a child. As you may know, the 'eu-' part is 'nice, great, best ever' while 'angelizo' is 'announce, declare.' Angels are 'announcers, messengers.' You can see the Greek root for the English.

When it is by itself, it is strictly about the one Gospel.

Now review the situation. Both Peter and Paul were send to 'euangelizo'--to preach the one Gospel TO the two groups. But not only that, Paul had just blasted the Judaistic deception called a gospel that was not. So he and Peter are TOGETHER on task while the opposing one was by the Judaizers and, where Paul worked, assaulting the Galatian people.

There is no sense at all that he is talking about two equal but distinct positive ones for the two groups, grammatically or situationally. Like most of 2P2P, it is a waste of time as far as how it is put together. Ignoring sense, context, reason and the NT.

Greek is more clear than english because of declension. Declension of words means that there are spellings that distinguish:
SUBJECT
OBJECT OF PREOPOSITION
DIRECT OBJECT
INDIRECT OBJECT

Each has a separate spelling or marking. When you get Greek tools, one of them should be an exegetical lexicon because it is simply an official list of the case of each usage. The other kind of lexicon is literary--the actual examples from all kinds of literature of the meaning(s), and thicker the same way that the Oxford dictionary is thicker due to all the literary examples.
Click to expand...


Hi and you do know that THE Greek ARTICLE IS USED like this !!

I ( Paul been entrusted with the gospel of THE UN-CIRCUMCISION and the ARTICLE points to a SPECIFIC GOSPEL that is called the UN_circumcision !!

Please notice that Peter's is just called THE CIRCUMCISION and that gospel is NOT in the Greek text !!

The reason that GOSPEL is not used with THE CIRCUMCISION is because Paul's gospel is to be preached to the GENTILES as verse says !!

In verse 7 there are 2 GOSPELS and is UNDENIABLE !

Ans there is another GOSPEL in Gal 3:8 and another in Rev 14:6 !!

dan p
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
DAN P said:
Hi and you do know that THE Greek ARTICLE IS USED like this !!

I ( Paul been entrusted with the gospel of THE UN-CIRCUMCISION and the ARTICLE points to a SPECIFIC GOSPEL that is called the UN_circumcision !!

Please notice that Peter's is just called THE CIRCUMCISION and that gospel is NOT in the Greek text !!

The reason that GOSPEL is not used with THE CIRCUMCISION is because Paul's gospel is to be preached to the GENTILES as verse says !!

In verse 7 there are 2 GOSPELS and is UNDENIABLE !

Ans there is another GOSPEL in Gal 3:8 and another in Rev 14:6 !!

dan p
Click to expand...



Sorry dan but that is stupidity. I only have 4 graduate years in Greek and 3 of those under the textbook writer Ed Goodrick. When you diagram, you find the case or declension of the nouns before you slot them.
 
N

northwye

New member
Here is an interesting idea: The King James Version has been credited with helping to create the English language after it came out in 1611. But since about 80 percent of the verse wordings of the King James Version, like those of the Geneva Bible before it, came from the William Tyndale New Testament first printed in 1526 by Peter Schoeffer in Worms, Germany, it was really that Tyndale New Testament which helped form the English language after its publication in 1526 and later. So, the power of the English language after about 1526 came from Tyndale's English verse wordings of his translation of the Koine Greek Textus Receptus. This suggests that part of the structure, the grammar, of Tyndale's contribution to the English came from the Koine Textus Receptus, and Tyndale's own English word choices..
 
Tambora

Tambora

Get your armor ready!
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Galatians 2:7 KJV
(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;


"of", not "to".

"of" denotes possession

If it were the exact same gospel going to two different groups, there was no need to include "of" either of them.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Tambora said:
Galatians 2:7 KJV
(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;


"of", not "to".

"of" denotes possession

If it were the exact same gospel going to two different groups, there was no need to include "of" either of them.
Click to expand...

You cannot read Gal 1 and 2 without seeing the two separate ministries...unless you are a deceived dusty book of men scholar like IP.
 
D

DAN P

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
Sorry dan but that is stupidity. I only have 4 graduate years in Greek and 3 of those under the textbook writer Ed Goodrick. When you diagram, you find the case or declension of the nouns before you slot them.
Click to expand...


Hi and you say that the Greek word TES / THE is not in the Greek text , in Gal 2:7 ?

Is that what you are saying , WRONG , so check again !!

So you are calling me STUPID ??

dan p
 
Last edited:
Nick M

Nick M

Black Rifles Matter
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
SaulToPaul said:
Dear IP Genius,

If these are the same gospel to two different audiences, why did Paul IMMEDIATELY break the agreement made in Acts 15?
Click to expand...

Any day now....

You didn't answer in the other threads, and likely will not answer here. Paul went to the Jew first. Peter went to the Jew first.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top