Corpus-Paul

[Jerry Sumney <jsumney AT lextheo.edu>]

Anders writes:

Both of you have expressed the suspicion that Pauline formulation "works of
the law" might not have a precise parallel in Judaism. Let me just point
out the rhetorical function of the opposite pairs "works of the law" and
"salvation by faith".  In Perelmanian terms we could say that Paul is
making a rhetorical dissociation.   He creates a distinction in the greater
concept of "ways of obtaining righteousness".  The two terms in the
distinction might not have a precise parallel in reality.  Would even the
Qumranites have claimed that they dobtained righteousness by works of the
law?  Is this not Paul polemical desciption of opponents views?

In classical rhetorical categories Paul is constructing an argument from
the contrary.  Contraries are mutually exclusive terms, the opposite ends
of a continuum.  An argument from the contrary is an argument which posits
two terms as mutually exclusive. This is what Paul is doing in Gal 2:16.
The opposing terms in this case were probably constructed by Paul in his
argumentation on this particular issue.

The argument from contraries serves not just to support a thesis, but also
to provide that thesis with an opposing alternative.  This opposing
alternative can then be used as the dark background against which the
speaker's thesis is presented.  The way the speaker associates persons,
qualities and things, with the opposing contraries can then be used for the
construction of a whole ideological landscape, or theology.

Jerry replies:

Anders, this is exactly what I think Paul is doing.  In fact, I think Paul 
is the one who makes this a big theological issue.  I doubt that the other 
teachers thought that what they were asking of the Galatians contradicted 
Paul's teaching.

Jerry

Jerry L. Sumney
Lexington Theological Seminary
631 S. Limestone
Lexington, KY 40508
jsumney AT lextheo.edu
(606) 252-0361