I have received a number of emails asking me about the Cephas and Peter article I started giving a couple of posts ago, and most of the questions, as it turns out, are answered in the *second* half of the article, which I had originally planned not to provide here on the blog. So now I’ve decided, well—why not?
And over the next two posts I’ll provide the rest of the argument for anyone who is interested. As with the rest of the article, I have not included any of the footnotes, where I give some of the logic and evidence for my sundry points. But here are is some of the argument itself. If you don’t buy it, fair enough. If you do, fairer still!
The evidence of Paul has not been exhausted by this consideration of Gal 2:7-9. There remain the other references to Cephas in Paul’s letters, references that provide other points of interest. Indeed what is striking is that in virtually every instance, Paul’s references to Cephas contain something that is difficult to explain if in fact he meant “Peter,” Jesus’ disciple, the one who had received the “apostolate to the circumcised” (Gal 2:8) just as Paul received that to the uncircumcised.
In some respects the reference in 1 Cor 15.5 is the most interesting.
Here I’ll be offering a reading of some key passages that has never occurred to most people. Want to see what I have to say? It’s simple to join the blog, and costs very little. And every penny you pay goes to charity. So why not?<a href=”/register/”>Click here for membership options </a>