Sydney College of Divinity
An Antiquated Exegetical Convention? Ὅτε δὲ and Paul’sChronology of the Incident at Antioch in Galatians
Did Paul’s disagreement with Peter over Jew/Gentile table-fellowship (Gal. 2:11–14) occur before or after Paul’s visit to Jerusalem with Barnabas and Titus (Gal. 2:1–10)? Most modern scholars read Paul’s narrative in chronological order:the incident at Antioch proceeded Paul’s visit to Jerusalem. However, in the past, several scholars such as Gerd Lüdemann, Johannes Munck, and Theodor Zahn have claimedthe opposite—the incident at Antioch preceded Paul’s visit to Jerusalem.
This paper will consider Lüdemann’s grammatical argumentagainst the view that ὅτε δὲ in Galatians 2:11 continues Paul’s narrative. He claims that this “is just an antiquated exegetical convention that is unable to explain why epeita is not used.”According to James D. G. Dunn, Lüdemann’s overallargument, which extends beyond his grammatical claim, “has nothing to commend it.” John Bligh also discounts Lüdemann’s chronology, while acknowledging that Paul’s language “does not necessarily imply temporal sequence.”Although most would disagree with Lüdemann’s order of events, we should consider how Greek writers used ὅτε δὲ.Do we find any instances in Greek narrative where this construction incontrovertibly prefaces the insertion of an earlier event? In other words, does ὅτε δὲ introduce an event that does not follow chronological order?
Michael F. Bird calls Galatians 2:11–14 “a crucial piece of evidence about the conflict and diversity of the early church,” underscoring the necessity to analyse every possible detail of Paul’s account. Marshalling evidence from Ancient Greek literature, this paper will seek to make an exegetical contribution to research on Paul’s perspective of social tensions between Jews and Gentiles by either ruling out Lüdemann’s grammatical claim or putting it back on the table for further consideration.