Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: [Corpus-Paul] Gal 5:12

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: nanosmd AT comcast.net
  • To: Corpus-Paul <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [Corpus-Paul] Gal 5:12
  • Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2004 18:31:27 +0000

The curse wishes to which I referred are Gal 1:8-9. Curses were a common
feature of the time. In addition to Elli's work, which discusses this in some
detail, and of course discussions in most commentaries (Betz is good example,
and I think Witherington went into some detail too), check out the various
arguments of (and bibliographies available in):

K. Morland, The Rhetoric of Curse in Galatians, Scholars Press, 1995

B. Davis, Christ as Devotio, Univ. Press of America, 2002.

My own work stresses the intra-communal dimension of the situations Paul's
rhetoric suggests (to me). In particular, it focuses on the intra-Jewish
dynamic that arises for Paul and his compatriots. Why? Because they maintain,
against (minority group) Jewish (which is inclusive, providing for proselyte
conversion) and (majority group) pagan communal norms (which allow for
proselytes to be counted as Jews rather than fellow pagans obliged to civic
and family cult observance), that these non-Jews remain non-Jews and yet not
behave like pagans (an identity proposition that is unintelligible in their
present Jewish/non-Jewish propositional world, i.e., pre-Christianity as a
new non-Jewish and yet non-pagan identity, that is).

In Gal 1:8-9 Paul wishes a curse upon any who would seek to upend the
proposition upon which that stance is based, namely, the meaning of Jesus
Christ for them "while remaining non-Jews" (ie., what Paul calls "the truth
of the gospel"). He includes even himself in that wish, if he were to do the
same (which he had apparently done in the past). But that does not for me
alter that it is a non-tolerant position to take, or worse.

And yet his letters often argue for and are based upon propositions that are
respectful of difference (upon which I prefer to focus in my work!). So I
think that we see him here undermining his own overarching (coherent)
position in the thick of the contingent situation in which he feels his
coalition's interest are seriously threatened, so he behaves (writes
instructions) in an inhumane way that belittles the values upon which the
overarching propositions of his gospel message (and Torah of love of the
neighbor) are based, it seems to me. Such language should be highly
contextualized; ie., it should not serve as a basis for determining policy
for those who look to Paul's voice as authoritative. It is here a very human
(read: inhumane) voice, and it is undermined even by the larger propositions
he maintains. (I do not think that Paul would have had this language
memorialized [as it is in by the fact of its preservation when approached as
God's voice for the church universal], any more than the parent engaged in
ironic rebuke of children would want the neighbors to think that what is said
in those frightening moments reflects their evaluation of the other parents
or their children in absolute terms.)

The irony is that while fighting for the rights of one group's entitlement
(as equals) he undermines the same rights for another group (as equals). The
sad thing is that this irony has not been sufficiently recognized or
accounted for in many of the appeals to Paul's voice which have negatively
valued Jewish identity and motives and behavior (as less than equal with
"non-Jewish" [read "Christian"] identity and motives and behavior) ever since.

By the way, you had asked about whether the language of 5:12 implied
excommunication. I do not think so. I do not think that his addressees where
in any such position to remove those influencing them to the tradtional norms
of identity transformation. Rather, the letter, and this statement, aim to
persuade them to resist (note esp. that 5:1 is a call to resistance, not
removal). This implies a subordinate position, as one would expect to be the
case if addressing non-Jews within a Jewish subgroup, as I suppose it to be.

Perhaps a bit more than you bargained for, but as you can see, an issue with
implications that are important to discuss (and often not discussed, when the
topic of these curse wishes arises).

Regards,
Mark
--
Mark D. Nanos, Ph.D.
Rockhurst University
co-moderator
nanosmd AT comcast.net
http://home.comcast.net/~nanosmd
> At 04:20 PM 1/1/04 +0000, you wrote:
>
> >While constructing his argument, which explores many avenues to dissuade
> >the
> >addressees from compliance with the influencers, Paul includes this and
> several
> >other mean-spirited expressions (like curse-wishes) that give us a glance
> >into
> >the human social dimension of the enterprise that gave rise to these
> >letters.
>
> Thank you for this and the rest of your post Mark. Would you mind expanding
> on the above paragraph a bit- as I find it interesting. And if there is
> bibliogrpahy on Paul's curse-wishes I would love to know it.
>
> thanks
>
> jim
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Dr Jim West
> Pastor, Petros Baptist Church
> http://biblical-studies.org -- Biblical Studies Resources
> http://biblical-studies.blogspot.com --- Biblical Theology Weblog
>
> Bad exegesis is no less worse than bad conduct.
> Tertullian, On Purity
>
> _______________________________________________
> Corpus-Paul mailing list
> Corpus-Paul AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/corpus-paul




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page