 |
| English: Map of the Letters of Galatia (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
In
the first entry in the Bible Junkies Online Commentary on Galatians, I
discussed introductory matters concerning the founding of the churches to the
Galatians, the situation when Paul wrote to them, when the letter might have
been written and the type of letters which Paul wrote, based on the common
Greco-Roman letters of his day. In
the second post, I considered the basic content and breakdown of a Pauline
letter. I noted the major sections of the formal letter structure and, in the
context of each section, outlined the theological and ethical (as well as
other) concerns of Paul, including some Greek words which will be examined more
fully as we continue with the commentary. In
the third entry, I looked at the salutation, which is long for Paul’s
corpus (only Romans 1:1-7 is longer) and briefly commented on the lack of a
Thanksgiving, the only letter of Paul’s which does not have one. The
fourth entry discussed the opening of the body of the letter, a significant
part of the letter especially in light of the absence of a Thanksgiving. In
the fifth entry, I examined the beginning of the opening of the body of the
letter, in which Paul describes his background in Judaism and I placed this in the
context of Judaism in the Hellenistic period. In the
sixth post in the online commentary, I continued to look at Paul’s
biographical sketch of his life, this concerning his earliest life as a
Christian. In
the seventh post, I examined what Paul says about his subsequent visit to
Jerusalem to see the apostles and the Church in Jerusalem.
In the eighth entry, Paul confronts Cephas about his hypocrisy in
Antioch.
The
ninth blog post started to examine the theological argument in one of
Paul’s most important and complex theological letters. In
the tenth entry, Paul makes an emotional appeal to the Galatians based on
their past religious experiences and their relationship with Paul. In
the eleventh chapter in the series, Paul began to examine Abraham in light
of his faith. The
twelfth blog post continued Paul’s examination of Abraham, but also claims
that Christ “redeemed” his followers from the “curse” of the Law. In
the thirteenth study in the Galatians online commentary, we looked at
Paul’s claim that God’s promises were to Abraham and his “offspring,” with a
twist on the meaning of “offspring.” The fourteenth entry, found below,
examines Paul’s question, in light of his claims about the law, as to why God
gave the law.
4. Paul’s Letter to the Galatians
d) Body of the Letter (1:13-6:10):
iv) Theological Teaching (2:15-5:12): Why then the law? (3:19-20) part 1.
19 Why then the law?
It was added because of transgressions, until the offspring would
come to whom the promise had been made; and it was ordained through angels by a
mediator. 20 Now a mediator involves more than one party; but God is one. (NRSV)
Paul has been lead quite naturally to an important question
given what he has said about the Law of Moses previously. So Paul asks the
question that must have been on the first hearers’ and first readers’ minds,
just as it is on ours: “Why then the Law?” (Galatians 3:19)
Paul answers his question straightforwardly, which is not to
say in a manner that leads everyone to agree on the meaning of the simple
phrase: the Law “was added because of transgressions,” or “for the sake of
transgressions” (Galatians 3:19). The Greek is tôn parabaseôn charin and scholars have proposed three possible interpretations
of these three words:
1.
The law was added due to the reality of
transgressions which necessitated the giving of the law until the offspring
would come;
2.
The law was given to increase transgressions
until the offspring came (see Romans 4:15);
3.
The law was given to keep transgressions in
check until the offspring came.
It is possible to see 1. and 3. together, that is, since
there were transgressions it was necessary to give a law to restrain them, but
2. must be seen alone if the purpose of the law is to increase or produce
transgressions. This is one reason for rejecting 2., that the law was given to
produce transgressions, given that transgressions already existed apart from
the law and no law was needed to create them (only to evaluate and judge them
differently). I think 3. especially comes to the fore in light of Galatians
3:23-25, which we will examine next entry, and which indicates that the law was
intended to restrain transgressions until the coming of the “offspring” or the
Messiah. This indicates that the law had an essential and functional role to keep
transgressions in check.
The task or work of
the law was completed when the “offspring would come to whom the promise had
been made” (3:19). The coming of the offspring means that the law in Paul’s
thinking had a limited role chronologically as well as theologically and that
its purpose has now been reached. This is not so much a negative evaluation of
the law, though many of Paul’s Jewish peers would certainly have disputed this,
as a positive evaluation of the role of the Messiah, Jesus Christ and the
fulfillment of the promise to Abraham, as
we saw in the previous entry, through Jesus’ coming.
On the other hand,
when Paul reflects common Jewish belief at the time that that law was “ordained
through angels” (3:19) - a tradition developed from Deuteronomy 33:2, 33:23
(LXX) and Psalm 68:17 and found in Josephus, Ant. 15.5.3, Jubilees 1.27-29, Acts 7:53 and Hebrews 2:2 – it does
seem that this comment is intended to diminish the law in light of the coming
of the “offspring.” The law was given by
an angel not directly by God, unlike Jesus who comes directly to the people
from God or the promise which was given directly by God to Abraham.
The phrase “by a
mediator” has also been a difficult phrase to understand, though most commentators
have opted to understand the “mediator” as Moses, the one to whom the law was
given. The basis for this emerges from Leviticus 26:46, Numbers 36:13 and Deuteronomy
5:4-5 and Philo explicitly calls Moses a mediator in Philo, Moses, 2.166.
When Paul adds, “now
a mediator involves more than one party; but God is one” (Galatians 3:20), what
is Paul’s purpose? He has already said that the law was given through angels to
a mediator. There are two ways, I think, to understand this, as noted above:
1.
Those
who follow Jesus and are in the promise have direct access to God through Jesus
without need of a mediator;
2.
The law
needed the mediation of angels and Moses for the people of Israel, while God
gave the covenant promises directly to Abraham.
I am not certain
which one makes the best sense of the verse, it seems both are possible, but it
does appear that Paul’s general point is that direct access is gained to God
through Jesus Christ, even if Paul has in mind that the covenant promises were
made directly to Abraham. Since it is the “offspring” to whom God’s promises to
Abraham’s are ultimately directed according to Paul, either 1. or 2. takes us to
the unmediated reality of Jesus Is this
more a negative statement about the law or a positive statement about direct access
to God through Jesus according to the covenant promise? Given Paul’s rhetorical
battles with the Galatians and the interlopers in the community, it must be
both negative and positive.
Next entry, Was the Law opposed to God’s promises?
John W. Martens
I invite you to follow
me on Twitter @Biblejunkies
I encourage you to
“Like” Biblejunkies on Facebook.
This entry is cross-posted at America Magazine The Good Word
0 comments:
Post a Comment