Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - [Corpus-Paul] Romans 4/Galatians 3 Obligation and the Covenant

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: [Corpus-Paul] Romans 4/Galatians 3 Obligation and the Covenant
  • Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 14:26:22 -0500

From: "meta" <meta AT rraz.net>
To: "Corpus-Paul" <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Subject: Re: Richard:Re: [Corpus-Paul] Toward a Theology of OT
Covenant
Date sent: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 18:11:22 -0700


> Very good question, Dr. McGinn. I don't know what John had in mind,
> but my source is Chap. 15, because of Abram's "faith." It appears all
> three biblical references come from author J. The first, 12:1-4a:
> Yahweh pronounces his blessings, and Abram follows as directed by
> Yahweh; but also 6-9: Yahweh promises the land to Abram's offspring,
> and Abram responded by building an alter there and also at the place
> where he settled (purportedly for sacrifice), worshipping (invoking
> the name of) Yahweh.

John responds:
You are building a credible argument here IMO, Richard. What are we talking
about in
terms of the faith of Abraham? Is it fideism or belief in a creed? Or, is it
faith as an
'emerging paradigm' (Marcus Borg) or gradual realization of truth?

You have noted the use of the 'mn trilateral root in the Hebrew verb
translated by our
English 'faith.' The verb in Genesis 15:6 is in the hiphil stem which is the
causative of
the qal. Thus, while mn in the qal is something that is firm, mn in the
hiphil is
something that you make firm or cause to be firm which lends further
credibility to the
scenario you are proposing: Abraham makes the 'voice' that he hears and
believes to be
from the god YHWH something that is firm or established by acting on what
begins as a
type of hunch and moves toward a firm conviction. It would be good to add to
your
argument that Abram leaves his country because YHWH says 'leave yoru country'
(Genesis 12:1) and then follows with the promise.

This is not the same as fideism which stresses the belief in certain facts
about god that
must be 'believed' before one can expect the blessing from god. This is in
substance what
becomes Christianity and becomes the undoing of Christianity in the view of
folk like
Marcus Borg (i.e. 'The Meaning of Jesus'). People are asked to believe 'iffy'
things in
relation to Christ (i.e. his diety, his resurrection, etc.) instead of being
encouraged to
walk a path along a gradual realization of the truth about Christ.

It is interesting that Jacob does not approach YHWH/Elohim in this same
manner. He
strikes the kind of bargain you are proposing for Abraham 'if God will be
with me .. so
that I return safely to my father's house ... then YHWH will be my God'
(Genesis
28:20).

It is also noteworthy that while Paul holds up the faith of Abraham as the
exemplar
rather than the faith of Jacob. Indeed, Jacob is called a 'worm' by the
prophets. He is the
one who negotiates with God and will only serve God if God does what he wants
and
this is the approach the take to be that of Israel/Judah.

Paul is also saying that the pact/contract approach to obedience that is in
substance the
Mosaic Covenant is inferior to the emerging trust of Abraham. It is based on
the fear of
punishment (which John argues 'love casts out'). There cannot be a covenant
without
obligation (i.e. YHWH doesn't come to a citizen of Ur and simply make
promises) but
the obligation must come from within a heart convinced rather than from
without and
through fear of sanction.


.





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page