To MHughes976 — Interesting comment — maybe you’re right, but I’m not entirely convinced. You’re right about the plural of Greek being Hellenes (I should have read my Liddell and Scott more carefully), and my Greek is rusty. So I used a King James translation side by side with the Greek New Testament. But Hellen also had the meaning “Gentile”; the King James version translates Romans 2:9, to which Yoni refers above, as saying, “What then? Are we better than they? No, in no wise; for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin….” The word in the Greek for “Gentiles” is Hellenas, which is an accusative plural form. In Romans 1:14, we have Hellesin te kai Barbarois …., which is “to the Greeks, and to the Barbarians,” from the line “I am debtor to both the Greeks, and to the Barbarians….” in the King James. So Hellen is a third-declension noun, I suppose. But if there are no form differences in the plural for “Greeks” and “Gentiles,” what contexts did the translators of the King James Bible use to make the distinction? Other texts in different languages? I’m not a Bible scholar, so I don’t know. In any case, I do think that there was clearly a Hellenes vs Ioudaioi distinction, which I see as “Gentiles” vs. “Jews,” or adherents to Judaism. And there was not an absolute distinction between Ioudaioi and Christians during Paul’s time, since some (most?) of the Christians also considered themselves Ioudaioi. For example, at one point Paul reproaches Peter, whom he calls Ioudaios, for living like a Gentile while expecting the Gentiles to follow the Law (Galatians 2:14) — as I see after writing this you already pointed out.