Corpus-Paul

[Antonio Jerez <antonio.jerez AT privat.utfors.se>]

Dear Moon,

I agree 100 % with your reading on Paul's view about the Law in relation to
both Jew and Gentile. The convenantal nomism that most "normal" Jews 
appear to have adhered to stated that trying to follow Torah and repentance
was enough for salvation for Jews. If Paul had really adhered to this there
would have been, in his view,  no need whatsoever for Christ to die a 
redemptive
for the Jews - Christ would only have died for the redemption of the Gentiles.
That is why Paul first has to do away with the old Law in order to build up a 
new Law,
Christ's Law.

Best wishes

Antonio Jerez
Goteborg, Sweden 

> [Moon]
> 
> It means that I am not satisfied with your explanation as to 
> why Galatians' attempt to "be under the Law" is so bad. Yes, Galatians were 
> under pressure to get circumcision, to be under the Law.  They
> did not have to. Moreover, it was the desire of the flesh to "be
> under the Law" and thereby to get acceptance from the mainstream
> community. It amounted to not understanding and going AGAINST 
> what God was doing at the age to come. It was bad enough. Paul had to
> fight, both for the Gentiles and the Jews as well. For the Jews, 
> because his losing in the fight meant that God failed to "redeem those 
> under the Law", and failed to bring the salvation that the Jews had been
> waiting for generation after generation.
> 
> But what I wonder is whether what was at stake was only that 
> Gentiles could be included into people of God without becoming people
>  of the Law, which was good in itself. If so, it means that God sent 
> Christ and Christ died at the cross only to make God's salvation available
> to Gentiles as well.  But it does not seem to be a big deal, because
> there was a way for Gentiles to become people of the Law and thereby
> people of God. Then Paul fought so that Gentiles might become
> people of God via his way. 
> 
> But Paul's letter indicates that there were more to it. The issue was
> more than Gentiles could be God's people without becoming people of the
> Law. The issue was that the economy under the Law failed, and God sent 
> Christ to redeem those under the Law from the failed regime. It failed not 
> because the Law was bad, it failed because humans are flesh. The issue was
> the transfer or liberation from the realm of sin and death, which the 
> economy under the Law could not overcome. Doesn't Rom 8:1-5 point to that?
> 
> There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ. For the 
> law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from
> the law of sin and death. For God has done WAHT the LAW, weakend by
> the flesh, COULD NOT DO: sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful
> flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that 
> the righteous requirement of the law may be fulfilled in us, who walk not
> according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
> 
> So, by "flesh" Paul seems to refer not just human weakness likely to
> surrender social pressure to conform the mainstream norm, but also
> the fundamental weakness that caused the economy of the Law have failed.
> Though I cannot claim that I have experienced the empowering of the
> Spririt which Paul assumes for the recipients of this letters (
> cf. James Dunn), receiving the Spirit and being empowered by it
> is one of the main thrusts of his gospel and theology. 
> So, the liberation through Christ has some ontological dimension,
> if not psychological, as well as sociological dimension.  
> 
> Waiting for your comments.
> 
> Moon
> Moon R. Jung
> Associate Professor
> Sogang University
> Seoul, Korea
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to corpus-paul as: 
> antonio.jerez AT privat.utfors.se
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to $subst('Email.Unsub')
>