Corpus-Paul

["Dieter Mitternacht" <dieter.mitternacht AT teol.lu.se>]

John

Thank you for your reply. I enjoyed reading it and wish we had a couple of weeks to pursue each of your points in detail. But other obligations demand my attention and I have to limit myself to a few clarifying comments.

Dieter wrote:
>.... 8. Trust in and faithfulness to God without the "adoption as sons" amounts to
> inferior conditions.
 
>> John adds:
>> I would reiterate here what I have said above: Because we adhere to a
>> recognized system of beliefs, we should not presume to put ourselves on
>> the side of Paul while leaving those from other recognized belief systems
>> opposed to Paul and, therefore, outside of the promise.

I agree. I was concerned with reconstructing the argument of a text, not "putting myself on the side of Paul".
 
> Dieter continues:
> ...  11. Jews without Christ lack the second heritage. Their trust in and faithfulness to God
> continues to require the pedagogical function of the nomos. Apart from
> that, why should God revoke his promises? The law did not annul the
> promise given to Abraham, so why should Christ annul the law for those to
> whom God had given it?
 
>> John adds:
>> Here again, I offer the qualifier that in our present discussion we put
>> all faith systems (including Christian systems) in the same boat as the
>> Jewish faith system when discussing the implications of the first
>> communication situation of Galatians. ..."

Same comment as above. I did try to make my position clear with the concluding comment in my earlier post. To be even clearer, let me add that belief in the superior distribution of the Spirit to Christ-believers coupled with the expectation of a superior community life (as assumed by Paul), can hardly be taken serious, except as a rhetorical device. As an actual expectation it failed just as much as the one of the imminent return of Christ.

>> John wrote :
>>     For the Jewish Christ-believer it would mean becoming like Paul with the
>> stigma of rejection from the greater Jewish community because of the
>> acceptance of non-proselyte Gentiles as co-equals.
>>    For the proselyte
>> Christ-believer it would also mean rejection by the larger Jewish
>> community for the same reason.
>>    But for the non-proselyte Christ-believer
>> it would mean relief from the void previously discussed because of the
>> fellowship of those who are also coming under the same stigma.

Since you refer to "the void previously discussed", the impression arises that you are referring to a point I was making. My point of course is that the social, political and religious void is a consequence for Gentiles becoming Christ-believers in Galatia. Jews and proselytes that became Christ believers could form (more or less separated and stigmatized) subgroups within the larger synagogual community. Similar to the situation in Antioch (Gal 2 seems to portay Peter and Barnabas as leading distinct groups but within the sphere of Jewish communal control) the ones marginalised are Gentile Christ-believers. They were the ones that were deprived of their cultural "habitat", they were the ones that could not coordinate their previous cultural and cultic obligations with  faith in Christ. The social and political problems that arose for Jews who became Christ-believers were minor in comparison. Once they withdrew from Gentiles, they were in the clear. I am simplifying for the sake of brevity. I am not denying of course that *whovever* proclaimed a crucified Christ as the son of God was challenging imperial powers. But as long as the confession did not conflict with citizenship obligations, civil authorities, relatives, business partners, etc., may not have cared that much.

 

IMO this articulates why Gentiles wanted to get circumcised in Galatia, as I wrote in the mentioned article (Recipient-Oriented Assessment, 433): "... neither Paul nor the addressees seem to have been concerned with the question that became so prominent among interpreters: “How can I find peace with God?” Instead, the addressees were asking themselves: “How can we find peace in this world?”, assured that peace with God was given them by grace...."

Dieter