Corpus-Paul

["moon-ryul jung" <moon AT saint.soongsil.ac.kr>]

Loren,
thanks for your input. You correctly summarized the issue of the
debate: 

But our disagreement hinges on a crucial point: My
conviction is that whenever Paul speaks of the law in
a negative way, he does so only in so far as how it
effects Gentiles (so Gaston and Gager -- though I do
depart from their own interpretations on several
points). 

This is your hypothesis. Under this hypothesis, those who were under the
Law
were the Gentiles. Thus the referent of "we" in Gal 3:13 is the Gentiles.

Let me state my hypothesis again by quoting what I wrote
in a previous email: 

Paul's language of "not from the
works of the Law but faith" was employed to fight for the inclusion of
Gentiles into the people of God by faith in Christ, WITHOUT them becoming
Jews by doing the works of the Laws, the identity markers of the Jewish
people.
I believe that everytime Paul talks about the Law (negatively), he has
in mind the issue of inclusion of the Gentiles. 

Under this hypothesis, the Law was what made the Jews Jews. Those
who had anything to do with the Law were the Jews, and
therefore, those whe were under the Law were the Jews. Thus the referent
of
"we" in Gal 3:13 is the Jews.

About your hypothesis, I do not know how you get there. But the way Gaston
is lead to the hypothesis seems dubious to me. One of his proof text is
Gal 3:13-14.

3:13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse
for us -- for it is written, "Cursed be every one who hangs on a tree"
--3:14 that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come upon THE
GENTILES, that WE might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

Gaston identifies THE GENTILES with WE, so that WE really
means WE THE GENTILES. It is not, however, clear how he can identifies
the GENTILES with WE here. As was discussed on this list as well, we can
take the verses to mean "Christ redeemed us the JEWS from the curse of the
Law...
that in Christ Jesus, the blessing of Abraham might come upon the GENTILES
that WE, both the Jews and the Gentiles might receive the promise of the
Spirit
through faith." (according to Mark Nanos, for example)  

Another text Gaston considers for his thesis is Gal 4:4-5.

But when the time had fully come, God sent forth his Son, born of
woman, born under the law, 4:5 to redeem THOSE WHO ARE UNDER THE LAW, so
that WE might receive adoption as sons.

Again Gaston identifies THOSE WHO ARE UNDER THE LAW with WE. 
I simply do not understand what kind of grammar supports such an 
identification. 

It is not clear how redeeming the Jews who were under the Law is connected
to the adoption of the Gentiles as sons. It is not clear what "to redeem
those
who were under the Law" means. But it seems clear that THOSE
WHO ARE UNDER THE LAW and WE refer to different groups. To me both Gal
3:13-14
amd 4:4-5 say that the redemption of the Gentiles was the "goal" or
"effect"
of the redemption  of the Jews from the curse/barrier of the Law, and so
the Gentiles do need to go back to the state under the Law, from which
even
the Jews had to be redeemed. You may argue that this cannot be
accepted by the normal Jews, so the hypothesis is wrong. But it 
it depends on how one interpret "redeem" in the context of Galatians.
I think that "redeem" should be interpreted so that THOSE UNDER THE LAW
and WE refer to different groups. 

Loren, our discusssions might look just the repetition of our positions. 
But it seems that even in this process, our tacit assumptions could
exposed
and pinpointed by you. That will cause me to abandon my hypothesis. 
I feel joy when I abandon a long-standing hypothesis. As I said, I am 
inclined to your position in a way. But I will still argue from my
hypothesis
for the sake of argument. This seems to be  the best way in which the
tacit
and wrong assumptions can be exposed.  
     
Hoping that our discusssion will continue and be fruitful.

Moon

Moon-Ryul Jung
Dept of Media Technology
Sogang Univ, Seoul, Korea