Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: [Corpus-Paul] Galatians 2:16: Exploring the Relationship between Faith and Works

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "John Brand" <jbrand AT gvsd.mb.ca>
  • To: Corpus-Paul <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [Corpus-Paul] Galatians 2:16: Exploring the Relationship between Faith and Works
  • Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 17:09:23 -0500

I had written:
> > Translators out of a desire to bring the english
> > sense into line with Pauline theology, prefer the contrastive sense
> > so that a man is justified through faith and not by works. I am
> > interested in exploring the possibilities of the exceptive sense: 'a
> > man is not being justified by works of the law except through faith
> > in of Jesus Christ.'

Ian:
> There is, of course, some recent literature about just this point.
> What your suggestion might not account for, however, is the last
> clause of 2:16. There Paul clearly says that justification is based on
> pistis Ihsou Christou *and not* works of the law (hoti ex ergwn nomou
> ou dikaiwthhsetai pasa sarx).

John:
Justification can be taken in the sense of 'normalization' or bringing into
conformity to
the norms embodied in the law which I think is the best sense to take the
present tense
here and in James 2:21-22. The object of the obedience is that faith might be
made
perfect so that faith is still the basis of the whole process. Again, Calvin
has some keen
insight IMO into the importance of faith as an inner working of the Holy
Spirit. As you
will know, the Reformed have the idea that conversion is a process whereby
faith is
worked in the heart of the elect. I think this gets at what is going on in
Galatians i.e.
Paul is concerned that if the Galatians begin to depend upon a rite rather
than the living
Christ, they will not become anything more than those who devour one another
(Galatians 5:26).

Ian:
So however we understand the ean mh in
> 2:16a, we cannot take an "exceptive" understanding of that clause as
> an exhaustive statement of Paul's theology on the subject.

John:
Certainly not. He is after all starting from the agreement among the apostles
and then
moving into his application to the Gentile.

Ian:
I also
> think that it is in part because of the clearly oppositional
> relationship between pistis Ihsou Christou and ergwn nomou set up in
> this latter clause that translators have usually avoided the exceptive
> reading of ean mh in 2:16a. After all, it would be strange for Paul to
> say that people can be justified by works of the law if they do it
> through faith in/of Christ, but then to contradict himself immediately
> and deny that any justification can come on the basis of works of the
> law.

John:
I think there is help in understanding that Paul is talking about 'we who are
Jews by
birth' (2:15) and that he understands that even the law observance is not
enough to free
them from the flesh. Peter appears to be in full agreement with Paul (Acts
15:11). The
law was supposed to purify the heart (Psalm 19:7ff) but the rites that were
being
substituted for the meditation on the law were preventing this from happening
among
the Jews. I think this is what Paul is objecting to and would be in agreement
with Jesus
and the prophets viz a vis 'I desire mercy and not sacrifice' (Mathew 9:13
quoting Hosea
6:6). That is while the work that is done in the believers heart is a gift of
God's grace, it
requires his active participation in terms of his doing what his faith leads
him to do
(Romans 14:23 'whatsoever is not of faith is sin'). The challenge of the
community is to
learn to let each other stand on his own faith rather than to coerce the
other into
following the path that seems right to the strong (or the weak). This IMO is
the reason
why Paul challenges a code that fits all.

John Brand
BA Bib Stu (Providence College, 1980) MMin (Providence Seminary, 1991)




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page