Mag. Claudia R. Wintoch
Pauline Epistles I
Dr Dave Ryser
World Revival School of Ministry
1. Introduction
2.
Galatians
2.1. Galatians 2:15-21
2.2. Galatians 3:1-14
3.
Romans
3.1.
Romans 3-4
3.2.
Romans 9
4. Conclusion
5. Bibliography
1. Introduction
Clearly no one is justified before
God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith." (Galatians 3:11)
Do we, then, nullify the law by this
faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law. (Romans 3:31)
Over the past two thousand years
Paul’s writings have caused much debate, confusion and wrong interpretation,
which unfortunately led to false theology that still pervades the Church today.
The apostle Peter already wrote: His
letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and
unstable people distort (2.Peter 3:16).
As seen in the two verses quoted
above, Paul seems to contradict himself in his letters concerning his opinion
of the law. To this day Räisänen claims: “Paul’s thought on the law is full of
difficulties and inconsistencies.” (Gager 2000:8). She writes:
“The situation today (ca. 1990),
then, is somewhat confusing. On a number of key issues a wide range of
interpretations are offered. Few of the basic problems that have arisen in the
course of the history of interpretation have really been solved, most of them
continue to engage modern scholars. Regarding Paul’s attitude toward Israel and
the law, either continuity or discontinuity may be stressed.” (Räisänen 96)
Paul seems to be for the law in some
passions, and against it in others. “Subordinationists” claim that Paul simply
changed his mind over the course of time, and that the anti-Judaism passages have
precedence over the pro-Israel passages. Paul therefore became the “father of
Christian anti-Judaism” (Gager 2000:9), and his writings were used over the
centuries – from Marcion to Luther and to this day – to justify replacement
theology. Today, Sanders’ position is the following: “This is what Paul finds
wrong in Judaism: it is not Christianity.” (Gager 2000:15).
Different techniques have been used
to handle the seeming contradictions in Paul’s writings. The psychological
technique pictures Paul as a schizophrenic man, who was torn between his old
ways of the law and the new way of Jesus, “the anti-Israel statements
reflecting his “real” views as a Christian convert, the pro-Israel statements
preserving his unresolved and yet-to-be-discarded loyalties as a Jew” (Gager
2000:7f).
Räisänen is an proponent of the
resigned technique, which simply acknowledges
contradictions and inconsistencies and accepts them, offering no
solutions or value for the Christian life, particularly in regards to Judaism.
The most radical technique discards
the difficult passages altogether, claiming that “his text has been commented
on and enlarged” (Gager 2000:9) at a later time.
However, the most widespread
technique has been “to subordinate one set of passages – always the pro-Israel
set – to the other, leaving the anti-Israel version as the true Paul” (ibidem).
The reader might wonder whether theologians throughout the ages have ever
considered other factors like the audience or situation Paul addressed in his
different letters, his purpose and rhetorical style .
Over the past 15 years new biblical
scholarship has emerged which has attempted to understand Paul’s writings in
their context and – leaving preconceived ideas behind – shows a more accurate
picture of Paul than ever, a Jewish man who had found his Messiah, who was
called to the Gentiles, and who addressed difficult issues of his time as
Gentile believers found the Jewish Messiah.
“Paul himself is a person identified
by way of Jewish circumcision. It is because of the honored status of this
standing that Paul is able to argue from a position of strength; on the one
hand, with Jewish people such as Peter on behalf of the Gentiles’ equality of
status by way of Christ (1:13-2:21[1]),
and on the other, with the Gentiles themselves to remain in their state as a
testimony to the meaning of the death of Christ on their behalf” (Nanos
2001:90f)
The
purpose of this paper is to examine some of the seemingly contradictory
passages relating to salvation by faith versus salvation by works/the law, in
the light of the forthcoming new biblical evidence.
2. Galatians
Paul had traveled through Galatia
where he established churches that consisted entirely of Gentiles. When he
wrote to the churches in Galatia, he addressed reports he had heard of certain
apostles trying to persuade the Gentile Christians to be circumcised and follow
the Mosaic law. Judaizers held onto the view that Gentile Christians had to
come under the law to be full participants of the faith, and because of the political
situation at the time this view had a certain appeal to the Gentile believers.
Judaism, as well as paganism, were accepted state-religions; however, Gentiles
following a Jewish sect did not belong to either group and were in danger of
persecution and imprisonment. In his letter, Paul uses the rhetorical device of
irony to show the Gentile believers the absurdity of following those apostles
and coming under the law. Not being able to be there in person and addressing
them personally, he has to use even stronger language in his letter to get
through to them with the truth. It is that irony that has been misunderstood
(not recognized) over the centuries and, taken literally, led to seeming
contradictions, wrong conclusions and false theology that has pervaded the
Church to this day:
“If we simply stay within Galatians
in noting that irony and varieties of wordplay were common to Paul, and might
be expected by those who already knew him, the evidence is sufficient to
suggest that the Galatian addressees could anticipate the use of irony,
especially in handling their current compromising state of affairs. (Nanos
2001:38)
2.1. Galatians 2:14-21
A man is not justified by observing
the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ
Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law,
because by observing the law no one will be justified
(Galatians 2:16).
Immediately preceding this passage
Paul gives us the context of his ‘speech’. Peter and Barnabas had enjoyed meals
together with the Gentile believers in Antioch, until Judaizers – certain men from James (verse 12) – came
and they withdrew from fellowship with the Gentiles, returning to Jewish food
laws, which Paul calls hypocrisy (verse
13). This incident inspires Paul’s exposition on faith and the law, which has
widely been misinterpreted as Paul rejecting the law altogether, denying “the
orthodox Jewish (Pharisaic) doctrine of salvation … that this ‘justification’
can be obtained only by doing and thus fulfilling the ordinances of the Torah”
(Betz in Gager 2000:85). However, Jews did not claim justification through the
Torah. Their father Abraham, who lived before the giving of the law, was
justified by faith and Jews understood that that was the way to be justified.
Paul is therefore not arguing against basic Jewish beliefs. Paul, a Jew
himself, addressed Gentile believers in his letter to the Galatians and makes a
strong point to bring across how ridiculous becoming proselytes would be for
them. Nanos (2001:154) brings it to the point:
“They [Peter, Barnabas and the
others present]were confronted, just as the Galatian addressees are in this
letter, with a level of ridicule that may be mistaken for that of an enemy of
their interests. There must be no compromise on this issue of Gentiles in
Christ becoming proselytes as long as the present age persists.”
Paul does not address Jews in this
letter, as some have tried to bring a Jewish audience in to underline their
interpretation[2]. In verse
16, the Greek word for man is
άυθρωπος[3]
(anthropos), a term Paul consistently
uses to denote Gentiles[4].
Another debated term is the phrase εξ έργων
νόμου (ez ergon
nomou), translated observing the law by
the NIV, and correctly translated works
of the law by the KJV, which “refers specifically to the ambiguous status
of Gentiles under the law”[5]
(Gager 2000:86). Mussner (Gager 2000:87) summarizes that “Paul absolutely does
not enter into dispute with Jews”. In verse 18 he calls himself a lawbreaker,
saying that he himself has now become justified by the faithfulness of Christ,
just as his fellow Gentile believers. Longenecker (Dunn 2001:83) states that
“the traditional concepts and language of covenant theology are being stretched
to breaking point in order to contain the contrast (that is, blamelessness in
nomistic righteousness is discounted as dung.” Paul contrasts “on the one hand,
covenant righteousness through blameless nomistic faithfulness and, on the
other hand, covenant righteousness through the faithfulness of Christ” (ibidem).
2.2. Galatians 3:1-14
Clearly no one is justified before
God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith." (Galatians 3:11)
Paul continues expounding to the
Gentile believers the futility of becoming proselytes, contrasting the works of
the law with faith in Jesus. However, Sanders (Gager 2000:87) still maintains
that “Paul’s rebuttal of Judaism” is being explained in chapter 3.
In the first five verses, Paul uses
“striking emotive language” (Stanton in Dunn 2001:103), grounding his argument
not on Scripture but the Gentile believers’ experience. He is asking them
rhetorical questions to get their attention and elicit the right answers.
However, he is not contrasting Judaism with ‘Christianity’, as scholars have
claimed, but Gentiles before and after Christ, addressing the particular
situation the Gentile believers were in.
In verses 6-14 Paul reminds his
readers of Abraham, who was justified by faith, and through whom all nations (πάντα
τά έθνη – panta
ta ethne[6]) would be
blessed. Paul tells them that this promise was fulfilled in Jesus, so that the
Gentiles were now released from the curse of the law, quoting Deuteronomy
27:26, Cursed is the man who does not
uphold the words of this law by carrying them out. Traditionally scholars
have claimed that Paul warns the Galatians of the law, calling it a curse since
it is impossible to carry out its requirements. However nowhere does Paul claim
that the law itself was a curse, but he is making a strong point addressing his
Gentile audience to show them the freedom they have in Christ. “The underlying
premise here is the double effect of the law – life for Israel, death for
Gentiles – a premise well attested in Jewish sources” (Gager 2000:89f).
3. Romans
While Paul addressed Gentiles who
wanted to become Jews in the letter to the Galatians, he is now confronted with
the opposite problem – Gentiles who totally reject Jews, thinking that Israel
had been replaced by those believing in Christ. It is ironic, really tragic,
that sixteen chapters of Paul’s discourse to show them their erroneous thinking
has not produced the fruit he intended. Instead, Paul has even been taken for
an “anti-Jew” himself and been named the father of replacement theology. The
author of Romans is
“a thoroughly Jewish Paul, functioning
entirely within the context of Judaism, giving priority to Israel, even willing
to give his life in the place of the Jewish people …. Paul’s problem, where his
fellow Jews were concerned, was with an ethnocentric exclusivism that denied
equal access to God’s mercy for non-Jews, as non-Jews, the “works of the Law”
by which Jewish privilege became a weapon instead of a tool” (Nanos 1996:9)
Contrary to the Galatians, the
audience Paul was addressing in his letter to the Romans was personally unknown
to him, since he had never been there himself before. However,
“the relationship between the two
letters is revealing – and decisive – for understanding Romans. It is difficult
to escape the impression that much of Romans is designed to correct misreadings
of Paul’s position on certain basic problems – the law of Moses and Israel, the
law and Gentiles, Christ and Israel – misreadings stemming in part from the
letter to the Galatians itself” (Gager 2000:103).
Paul is now making an effort to
explain that he has not abandoned the ways of Israel, and neither has God
rejected His chosen people, and so neither should the believers in Rome. He
asks rhetorical questions, cites the false citations of his own words and
repudiates every one of them. However, sadly it is only in our day that we
start to understand what Paul really wanted to convey.
3.1. Romans 3-4
What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what value is there in
circumcision?
(Romans 3:1)
Church history and scholars to this
day have answered this question – as others Paul asks[7]
– with none, seemingly not continuing
to read the answer Paul himself gives[8].
Käsemann (Gager 2000:115) calls it “a concrete attack on the Jews”.
In these two chapters of Romans,
Paul is addressing a fictional Jewish competitor[9],
who tries to bring Gentile believers under the law. Paul uses rhetorical
exaggeration in attacking this teacher to bring across his point clearly.
“Following an argument that appears to lead to one (false) conclusion, he
reveals the correct (unanticipated) response. Most modern readers have fallen
into his trap” (Gager 2000:117).
Paul did not “assert that the Torah
had been superseded in Christ”, as Räisänen claims (Nanos 1996:176), but he
shows that Gentile believers becoming Jews would mean denying his monotheistic
belief that the one God of Israel was the God of all humankind.
“Paul’s development of the
implications of the Shema as the foundation of his argument that God is
faithful to Israel and Torah, not to the exclusion of gentiles, but on behalf
of them – for the One God of the Jews first
is equally the One God of the
gentiles also. To maintain other wise
is to compromise his oneness. … The purpose of election and Torah must be set
in its worldwide purpose of salvation for all the descendants of Abraham”
(Nanos 1996:189).
However, the other side of the
argument was that the Gentile believers were
not to disassociate themselves from the Jewish believers, but keep the
unity in their communities, according to the guidelines laid down at the council
in Jerusalem (Acts 15). Paul’s position was “not built around rejection of the Law in view of the new age of
Christ, but around the rejection of any ethnocentric limitation of God’s
salvation to those under the Law alone” (Nanos 1996:177). “Even as the Law is
not nullified through faith (3:31), so too faith is not nullified through the
Law (4:13-17)” (Nanos 1996:189).
3.2. Romans 9
the people of Israel. Theirs is the
adoption as sons; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the
law, the temple worship and the promises. Theirs are the patriarchs, and from
them is traced the human ancestry of Christ
(Romans 9:4-5)
Chapters 9-11 of Romans have been a
challenge to the traditional understanding of Paul, since they overflow with
positive affirmations of the law and Israel. Traditional scholars offer no
explanation: “We have left out of consideration these three chapters (9-11),
chiefly because they do not form an integral part of the main argument” (Gager
2000:129). However, these three chapters constitute the climax of Paul’s
argumentation and are consistent with the rest of his letter.
Paul shares his heart for his Jewish
brethren, making emotional appeals to his readers, which was a rhetorical
device used by ancient writers, when reaching their climax. As in chapter 4,
Paul mentions the promise to Abraham again, which leads to the inclusion of the
Gentiles, and not the exclusion of the Jews replaced by Gentiles. He quotes
Hosea (9:25-26) and Isaiah (9:27-29), showing God’s “merciful election of
non-Jews” (Gager 2000:132) and “God’s mercy in preserving a faithful remnant
within Israel” (ibidem).
Verse 33[10]
– a quote from Isaiah – has
traditionally been understood as a reference to Christ. However, there is no
reason to assume that. Gager (2000:133) states that “much more likely is it a
reference to the Torah itself … and to
God”, which inspired Meyer to the
cynical but true statement: “There is no more striking example in the
Pauline letters of a crucial exegetical decision made on grounds extrinsic to
the text itself” (ibidem).
4. Conclusion
Do not boast over those branches [Israel] … Do not be arrogant … so that you may not be conceited. … All Israel
will be saved.
(Romans 11:18, 20, 25)
Paul had made his point, had shown
the Gentile believers the significance of their Jewish roots. Sadly, “in the
long run, of course, this warning was ignored. Gentile Christianity, in the
name of Paul, did become arrogant, proud, and boastful against Israel and in
the process completely abandoned Paul’s gospel” (Gager 2000:141).
2000 years of Christianity, of
replacement theology justified by the very words of Paul, a Jew who loved his
people so much he would have given his own salvation for theirs, and it is only
today that the Lord is restoring the truth to His people, taking away the veil
that has kept us from seeing the truth. By His grace new scholarship is coming
forth, with new understanding of who Paul was, who he wrote to and into what
situation, shaking off preconceived ideas and wrong lenses that have been
passed down through the centuries. Yes, Paul wrote to Gentiles – those wanting
to become Jews and those rejecting Jews – yet he always remained a Jew and
reminded his readers of God’s chosen people. The law had not saved them, but
their Messiah Jesus had fulfilled the law and through faith in Him, Jew and
Gentile were both justified.
5. Bibliography
Dunn, James D. G., Paul
and the Mosaic Law, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company: Grand Rapids,
MI 2001
Gager, John G., Reinventing Paul, Oxford University Press: New
York 2000
Nanos, Mark D., The Irony of Galatians, Fortress Press:
Minneapolis, MN 2002
Nanos, Mark D., The Mystery of Romans, Fortress Press:
Minneapolis, MN 1996
Räisänen, Heikki, Challenges
to Biblical Interpretation. Collected Essays 1991-2000, Brill: Leiden 2001
[1] Of Galatians.
[2] For example Sanders and Dunn (see
Gager 2000:86).
[3] Strong’s Number 444.
[4] According to Gager 2000:86; see
also Romans 3:28.
[5] Also in Romans 3:28.
[6] The Greek word
έθνος (ethnos) often denotes the Gentiles.
[7] For example Romans 3:31 Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith?
[8] Which is Much in every way! to verse 1, and Not at all! to verse 31.
[9] Romans 2:17 Now you, if you call yourself a Jew…
[10] See, I lay in Zion a
stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall, and the one
who trusts in him will never be put to shame.