corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Corpus-Paul
List archive
- From: "Harold R. Holmyard III" <hholmyard AT ont.com>
- To: Corpus-Paul <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?
- Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:09:23 -0600
Title: Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?
Dieter,
Let me pick 2:19 and 3:10 from your list for some comments. I agree that these passages seem to complement each other and also tie in with 3:19-20a. And I would like to make two points. First, having written these things Paul still asserts that the law is not opposed to the promises of God. Whatever else that may mean I think it does mean that for Paul there is no opposition between promise and law. Rather the resurrection of Christ marks the beginning of the Messianic age with a new level of Spirit distribution, from which both Jews (in their submission to the law and Christ) and Gentiles (in their submission to Christ) may benefit. 3:23 I think shows that Paul considers the distribution of the Spirit to be a positive event for both Jews and Gentiles. The battle between sarx and law has turned, Paul would argue I think, on a broad scale in favor of compliance through the Spirit (ch 5:13ff). It is also the initial Spirit experiences that he refers to in 3:1-5.
HH: I have not said that there is an opposition between promise
and law.
Second. your quote of Gal 2:19 continues with Paul's assertion that he had been crucified with Christ, which I think is an assertion that includes experiences of bodily suffering. If you allow me to include Phil 2 and 3, I think we can see that, for Paul, participation in Christ's death and resurrection is very real. It is a matter of being prepared and even desiring (Phil 3:10) the bodily sufferings of Christ for themselves, and thus of sharing the faithfulness of Christ (Phil 2:5ff).
HH: Paul's crucifixion with Christ is a doctrinal truth that
applies to all Christians. All believers have been crucified with
Christ.
Maybe the point I am trying to make becomes clearer if I add what I believe to be the core issue in Galatia. The desire for circumcision among Gentile disciples of Christ in Galatia is not based on a sense of incomplete soteriology, i.e. wanting to secure a righteous standing before God with the addition of works of the law.
HH: Paul's issue is people trying to be justified by keeping the
law, and he says so repeatedly. First, it is a basic contrast that he
draws when looking at the behavior of Peter. Peter's actions at
Antioch contradicted a basic principle of the gospel:
Gal. 2:16 Knowing that a man is not
justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ,
even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by
the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works
of the law shall no flesh be justified.
HH: Paul contrasts two principles, being justified by faith in
Christ or being justified by works of the law.
Rather, the wish for circumcision originates from the fact that - in an Anatolian environment -being a Gentile follower of Christ had turned out to be much more complicated than being a Jewish follower of Christ. What Paul is opposing is the desire to compromise the calling to follow in the footsteps of the crucified Christ.
HH: Paul speaks in terms of justification, and that undermines
the thrust of your argumentation. There was something deeper than mere
compromise:
Gal. 3:11 Clearly no one is justified before God by the law,
because, "The righteous will live by faith."
HH: The Galatians were tried to become perfect by acts of the
flesh:
Gal. 3:3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye
now made perfect by the flesh?
HH: Paul sharply contrasts faith and works:
Gal. 3:9 So those who have faith are
blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.
Gal. 3:10 ¶ All who rely on
observing the law are under a curse, for it is written:
"Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in
the Book of the Law."
HH: The entire section of Galatians 3:18-25 is aimed to dissuade
the Galatians from seeking justification through law-keeping.
Gal. 3:18 For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no
longer depends on a promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham
through a promise.
Gal. 3:19 ¶ What, then, was the purpose of the law? It was
added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise
referred had come. The law was put into effect through angels by a
mediator.
Gal. 3:20 A mediator, however, does not represent just one party; but God is one.
Gal. 3:21 ¶ Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law.
Gal. 3:22 But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.
Gal. 3:23 ¶ Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed.
Gal. 3:24 So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith.
Gal. 3:25 Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.
Gal. 3:20 A mediator, however, does not represent just one party; but God is one.
Gal. 3:21 ¶ Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law.
Gal. 3:22 But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.
Gal. 3:23 ¶ Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed.
Gal. 3:24 So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith.
Gal. 3:25 Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.
HH: But most importantly, Paul plainly declares that the
Galatians are seeking to be justified by the law:
Gal. 5:4 You who are trying to be justified by law have been
alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.
-
Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?
, (continued)
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?, Mark D. Nanos, 01/12/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?, Jim West, 01/12/2005
-
Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?,
Jim West, 01/12/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?, Mark D. Nanos, 01/12/2005
-
RE: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?,
Dieter Mitternacht, 01/13/2005
- RE: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?, Harold R. Holmyard III, 01/13/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?, Jeffrey B. Gibson, 01/13/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?, Dieter Mitternacht, 01/13/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?, Harold R. Holmyard III, 01/13/2005
-
Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?,
Calvin McCain, 01/12/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?, Harold R. Holmyard III, 01/12/2005
-
Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?,
Mark D. Nanos, 01/13/2005
-
Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?,
Dieter Mitternacht, 01/14/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?, Harold R. Holmyard III, 01/17/2005
-
Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?,
Dieter Mitternacht, 01/14/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.