Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: the role of the law in salvation-history

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Mark D. Nanos" <nanosmd AT home.com>
  • To: Corpus-paul <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: the role of the law in salvation-history
  • Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2001 14:25:31 -0500


on 10/1/01 12:57 PM, moon-ryul jung at moon AT sogang.ac.kr wrote:

[Mark]
>> I would just like to bring attention to a situational factor that should
>> effect how anyone goes about exegeting this curse language in Galatians.
>> The
>> issue being addressed to these non-Jewish addressees is not about observing
>> the Law, but about becoming proselytes, ie., people of the Law. Note the
>> ironic ridicule of 5:3 is aimed at the addressees failure to be thinking
>> about the result of that choice, observance of the whole Law. So the issue
>> to be determined in the argument of the letter is not about the
>> Law-observance of Israelites; that is the furthest thing from the mind of
>> the addressees. It must make sense of what Paul is trying to dissuade them
>> from: becoming Israelites.
>
[Moon]
> Yes, exactly. I have been trying to make sense of what Paul says in a way
> that I do not have to say negative things about the Law-observance of
> Israelites.
> At least, I would like to find a way to read Paul in this direction, and
> see
> if it is feasible and not forced. I am not satisfied at any of my attempts
> and
> attempts of others. But thanks again for setting up a clear guideline.
>
> In Rom 3:28-30, Paul disuades Gentile believers from trying to
> be righteoused by works of the law, i.e. practicing the deeds of the law,
> which are considered to be identity markers of being Jews. He does that
> by saying that that attempt makes God the God of Jews only, which
> contradicts the very foundation of Israel's religion. Here Paul does not
> employ any negative rhetoric to make his point.
>
> But in Galatians he uses negative rhetoric to make the same point. Is
> there
> any way to make sense of what Paul says without criticising the
> Law-observance
> of Israelites itself? George Howard's attempt is one of those ways, though
> I am not fully convinced. About Gal 3:10, 13, he says:
> (I am quoting him from your book " the Mystery of Romans". You quote him
> to agree with him.)
>
> They[Jews] were redeemed from the suppressing force of the law which
> separated Jew from Gentile and held back the universal unity which
> was destined to come. In our judgement the context points to this sense,
> and none other, that all men, both Jews and Gentiles, were redeemed from
> the law. In Christ's redemptive act, the law lost its divisive power
> and uncircumcised Gentiles were ushered into God's kingdom on equal
> terms with the Jews. This was salvation for Paul, for in that moment
> Yahweh became of the God of all men, and all men became his people".
>
> I like this attempt very much. But taking the "curse" language this way
> seem forced. The "curse" language of Gal 3:10 comes from Deut 27, where
> the curse is the one pronounced to those who fail to obey the law. Hence
> the "curse of the law" in Gal 3:13 should be taken to mean
> the curse pronounced to those who fail to obey the law. To take it to be
> the discrimination caused by the law seems quite out of context.
>
> James Dunn suggests that those who want to be of "works of the law" are
> under
> curse because they actually do not abide in the law. In fact, this is
> the plain meaning of 3:10. To be under curse, one should not abide in the
> law according to 3:10b (Deut 27:26). Dunn seems to say that doing
> the "works of the law" contradicts fulfilling the true intention of
> the law, which Deut 27:26 requires. It inevitably leads to criticizing
> the Law-observance of Israelites. This is not what I want at least for
> now.
>
> Though still unsatisfactory, in my post I took the "curse of the law"
> to be the historical curse that Israel has experienced and is still
> experiencing, and that was predicted to fall upon Israel (cf. Deut
> 4:23-26).
> This historical curse of Israel is what those who want to be of works
> of the law should consider. Why would they want to identify with Israel
> who was experiencing the curse of the law? Israel also needed to be
> redeemed from this curse (Gal 3:13). Saying that Israel eas
> experiencing the curse of the Law is not the same as criticizing the
> Law-observance of Isrelites. In sum, Paul tried to dissuade the Gentile
> believers from wanting to be of works of the law, by pointing out that
> Israel characterized by the works of the law was experiencing the
> curse of the law, from which Christ had to redeem "us" [the Jews].
> [ In 5:3, Paul employs another kind of dissuation,
> the fact that they would have perform all the law. ]
>
> Is this attempt satisfying your guideline for taking the curse language?

Moon,
This is an interesting approach. Yet I do not think Paul is trying to
dissuade these non-Israelites on the basis of something wrong with being an
Israelite, that is, in a universal statement, but just in one small
rhetorical point along the way.

The situation is a particular one that only arises because of the confession
of Jesus Christ by non-Israelites, an anomaly. The issue is that it is wrong
for these non-Israelites, since it undermines what they have already gained,
denying this implicitly, if they are seeking it as though not already
theirs. Not that they have gained Israelite status, but righteous status to
the same degree that they could gain this by becoming proselytes. So if now
seeking it, then they subvert that which they claim by way of faith in/of
Christ.

This whole point in 3:10-14 is merely a part of a larger point, and if that
larger argument is kept in view, then it will not take on the kind of
universal value it often does in Pauline discussions. Becoming Law-people
will not offer to these particular non-Law-people what they think it will
without also subverting what has initiated this interest in the first place.
For them it would represent a curse instead of a blessing, a moving
backwards, as though they are not participating in the time-line created by
Christ for them as non-Israelites (for an Israelite there is a curse and a
blessing, but these non-Israelites benefit from the blessing without the
curse). Why would they want to do that? is his point, for he thinks that
they have not considered the matter in such terms, and will be persuaded by
this and other points not to proceed on that other course (5:10).

Again, I do not think it is an absolute statement Paul would make if asked
the value of the Law ("much in every matter," he would respond, I think, but
one made for a particular effect on the reasoning of these non-Israelites
(it is not for them, and becoming one of its people does not offer what they
have begun to imagine, as though something more than what they are already,
instead, it would undermine what they are already, by implicitly denying its
reality).

--
Mark D. Nanos, Ph.D.
313 NE Landings Dr.
Lee's Summit, MO 64064
USA
nanosmd AT home.com






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page