 |
|
     |
|
|
|
The Glory of Kings: A Festschrift for James B. Jordan
Fyodor Dostoevsky
(Christian Encounters Series)
Athanasius
(Foundations of Theological Exegesis and Christian Spirituality)
The Four: A Survey of the Gospels
Defending Constantine: The Twilight of an Empire and the Dawn of Christendom
From Behind the Veil: The Epistles of John
Deep Exegesis:The Mystery of Reading Scripture
1 & 2 Kings
Brazos Theological Commentary
The Promise Of His Appearing: An Exposition Of Second Peter
A Great Mystery: Fourteen Wedding Sermons
Deep Comedy: Trinity, Tragedy, And Hope In Western Literature
Miniatures & Morals: The Christian Novels of Jane Austen
The Priesthood of the Plebs: A Theology of Baptism
A Son To Me: An Exposition of 1 & 2 Samuel
From Silence to Song: The Davidic Liturgical Revolution
Ascent to Love: A Guide to Dante's Divine Comedy
Blessed Are the Hungry: Meditations on the Lord's Supper
A House For My Name: A Survey of the Old Testament
Heroes of the City of Man: A Christian Guide to Select Ancient Literature
Brightest Heaven of Invention: A Christian Guide To Six Shakespeare Plays
Wise Words: Family Stories That Bring the Proverbs to Life
The Kingdom and the Power: Rediscovering the Centrality of the Church
The Son is sent to redeem (Galatians 4:5). He comes under the law to redeem those under the law.
Redemption is manumission language. To redeem is to deliver from bondage, or to buy from bondage. Those under the law are in bondage (cf. 4:1), still under the probationary regulations that apply to minor children.
So, the redeemed are the children. They are redeemed in the sense that they are brought from slavery under the law to the sonship that they were always destined to reach.
Law and sin are bound together. Torah provokes sin, and thus shuts Israel to sin. Israel needs redemption from law because the law has enslaved them to sin. But Galatians 4 is not, strictly speaking, talking about that. Sin apart, Israel would have needed “redemption” from the minority/slavery of the law.
So Adam: Created as a child, under “do not taste, do not touch” regulations until the fullness of time. And when the fullness of time would have come, Adam would have been “redeemed” from his slavery.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, February 8, 2011 at 11:34 am
According to Paul, the Son and Spirit come at the fullness of time, when the son (Israel) has reached majority.
Has Israel reached majority? It might seem not. But, following up on the previous post, we can view the exile and restoration as the climax of Israel’s maturation. Israel failed in many ways to live up to her status as mature sons, but Yahweh had organized everything to push them in the right direction:
Deprived of a king, Israel no longer can trust in chariots and horses. They are forced to trust the Lord who holds the king’s heart in His hands. That’s maturity!
Deprived of a military, Israel is forced to learn how to act out of weakness, forced to learn the power of weakness. That’s maturity!
Deprived of a temple (at least, without one as glorious as Solomon’s), Israel learns that they themselves are the temple of the living God. That’s maturity!
Promised a future king and future glory, Israel becomes Jensonian and live toward the future, to live in hope. That’s maturity!
Deprived of all empirical support for their existence as a people, Israel is forced to walk by faith. That’s maturity!
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, December 7, 2010 at 9:11 am
According to Galatians 4:17, the Judaizers seek to arouse the Galatians to see association with them by shutting them out. They shut the Galatians out so that those outside will clamor to get in. A clever and recurring ploy in all sorts of groups.
Paul uses the verb ekkleisai (“shut out”), a transparent pun on ekklesia. The church of Jesus has a table at the center; it is a place of hospitality. A church that shuts out, or a party within the church that shuts out, has become an anti-church.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 at 5:14 am
What does Paul mean by the phrase stoicheia tou kosmou, “elementary principles of the world”? We get a clue by looking at the meaning of related Greek works.
Stoicheion is related to a set of words that carry the connotation of “rank” or “series” or “order.” Stoichos (used by Herodotus) means ”rank”; steicho means “to go in ranks” or “to march,” especially in military array; stoichein comes to mean “to belong to a series,” and is used in botanical as well as a military contexts. Through this usage, it comes to have a transferred sense of “agree” or “be in harmony.” Thus the stoich- root has connotations of ordered classification. The verb describes the act of ordering, while the noun connotes those things ordered. Interestingly, stoichein sometimes means ”to be in agreement with ancestors,” that is, to conform oneself, order oneself to ancestral traditions.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, November 30, 2010 at 5:04 am
In the Old Testament, “flesh” physically describes the musculature of the body; the skin is the boundary between the world and the flesh, and there is a distinction made between the flesh and the heart or internal organs. Both in animals and men, “flesh” denotes the “meaty” portions of a body.
This is in the background of the use of the word “flesh” in the laws of impurity in Leviticus 12-15. When the flesh breaks through the boundary of the skin, the result is defilement. Flesh/meat coming through the skin is the sign of skin disease, and outflows from the flesh defile. In the latter cases, flesh is clearly a term that describes the genitals (Leviticus 15 especially). This use of flesh is linked to the flesh of circumcision: The sign of covenant membership is a sign in the flesh, not only in the body but in the penis.
This is the starting point for Paul’s use of flesh terminology throughout his letters. A number of these uses refer specifically to the “flesh of the foreskin” (Romans 2:28). A related usage is to describe “descent” or “genealogy.” Jesus is “of the seed of David according to the flesh” (Romans1:3), and Abraham is “forefather according to the flesh” (Rom 4:1). Paul speaks of his kinsmen according to the flesh (Romans 9:3) and points out that Christ is of the Jews according to flesh (Romans 9:5). Some who are children of the flesh, that is, descended from Abraham or circumcised, but are not children indeed (cf. 11:14). See also the phrase “Israel after the flesh” in 1 Corinthians 10:18.
From this connotation of descent, the term expands to include all the advantages that come with birth and heritage and background.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, November 9, 2010 at 5:40 am
At the beginning of Galatians 3, Paul reminds the Galatians of his first visit to them and says that Christ was “publicly portrayed” before them. This was before their eyes; now, someone has laid an “evil eye” on them.
This verse is sometimes taken as a reference to the vivid character of Paul’s preaching. But the wording suggests something visual, and besides Paul consistently says that he doesn’t appeal to his listeners with deceptive and highly rhetorical language.
We get a clue to what Paul is talking about in Galatians 4:13. When Paul first visited, he was ill, suffering a weakness of the flesh. Paul considers this significant: they heard the gospel from one whose flesh was weak, and yet soon after they begin putting confidence in the flesh (3:3). They had a visual representation of the gospel before them in Paul, an apostle whose weakness embodied the crucifixion.
This is also the point of 6:17, Paul’s reference to his “stigmata,” which no doubt refers to the marks on his body left by stones, beatings, and other persecutions. Like an ancient Roman soldier, Paul shows off his battles scars to prove that he is an apostle to the crucified.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, November 9, 2010 at 5:02 am
J. Louis Martyn (Galatians (The Anchor Yale Bible Commentaries)
Martyn does not think “unveil” captures Paul’s idea. Rather, the image is one of invasion: “The genesis of Paul’s apocalyptic . . . lies in the apostle’s certainty that God has invaded the present evil age by sending Christ and his Spirit into it. There was a ‘before,’ the time when we were confined, imprisoned; and there is an ‘after,’ the time of our deliverance. And the difference between the two is caused not by an unveiling, but rather by the coming of Christ and his Spirit.”
The structure of Paul’s reception of the gospel is the same as the structure of the gospel itself – both involve an apocalyptic coming of the Son. Thus Paul becomes the one in whom the Father has chosen to display His glory.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Thursday, October 28, 2010 at 1:31 pm
Paul claims to have been separated by God’s good pleasure from his mother’s womb (Galatians 1:15; Gr. koilias metros), so that the Son could be unveiled (apokalupsai) in him. There’s a rich Old Testament background.
Most obvious is the link with Jeremiah, who is also separated from his mother’s womb as a prophet to the nations (Jeremiah 1:5), as Paul is separated out to be a prophet to the Gentiles. That is quite precisely the sequence of Paul’s thought: “the one who separated me from my mother’s womb . . . that I might evangelize among the nations” (Galatians 1:15-16).
But Paul is also a Samson, who was a separated Nazirite from his mother’s womb (Judges 16:17). And, Paul is linking himself to the servant of Yahweh, called and named from his mother’s womb, equipped with a sharp sword in his mouth, made an arrow of the Lord (Isaiah 49:1-2). Isaiah 49:3 is revealing:
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Thursday, October 28, 2010 at 5:02 am
The verb for “rescue” that Paul uses to describe the effect of Christ’s self-gift (Galatians 1:4) is the same word Jesus uses for plucking out eyes (Matthew 5:29; 18:9). It is an exodus term: Stephen uses it to describe Yahweh’s rescue of Joseph from his afflictions (Acts 7:10) and Yahweh’s deliverance of Israel from Egypt (Acts 7:34).
The apostles were regularly “plucked out” from danger. TThe Lord plucked Peter out of prison (Acts 12:11) and Paul from the mob that was trying to kill him (Acts 23:27). Jesus’ promise to Paul on the Damascus road was that He would “pluck” Paul from both Jews and Gentiles who sought to kill him (Acts 26:17).
When Paul uses the word in Galatians 1, it is not to be “spiritualized.” Through Jesus’ death, He literally made a way for Jews and Gentiles to be delivered from the age that was lurching toward destruction. Those who preach another gospel, and want to cling to the old order of circumcision and purity, are anathema, that is, cast back to the world that will be utterly destroyed.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Thursday, October 28, 2010 at 4:08 am
INTRODUCTION
Is the Reformation dead? Leading Protestants have asked the question in recent years, and other leading Protestants have answered the question by converting to Rome or Orthodoxy. We believe the answer is No. On the other hand: Living things grow and change.
THE TEXT
“When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. For prior to the coming of certain men from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and hold himself aloof, fearing the party of the circumcision. . . .” (Galatians 2:11-3:14).
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Monday, October 25, 2010 at 6:51 am
In a 2007 article in NTS, Martinus de Boer carefully examines Paul’s argument in Galatians 4, armed with the assumption that stoicheia somehow retains its original meaning, referring to the four elements of ancient Greek physics.
His conclusion is: “the phrase ta stoicheia tou kosmou in 4.3, a technical expression referring specifically to the four constituent elements of the physical universe, is being used by Paul as a summary designation for a complex of Galatian religious beliefs and practices at the center of whichwere the four elements of the physical cosmos to which the phrase concretely refers. In Paul’s usage, then, the phrase is an instance of metonymy whereby a trait or characteristic stands for a larger whole of which it is a part. In this case ta stoicheia tou kosmou – the four elements of physical reality – stand for the religion ofthe Galatians prior to them becoming believers in Christ. Calendrical observancesand the physical phenomena associated with such observances – the movements of the sun, moon, planets, and stars – were an integral part of these religious beliefs and practices. The gods the Galatians worshiped were closely linked to the four stoicheia so that worship of these gods could be regarded as tantamount tothe worship of ta stoicheia themselves.”
De Boer also suggests that the use of this phrase plays a strong rhetorical role in Paul’s argument, associating embrace of Torah with a reversion to the paganism from which the Galatians had so recently converted. Conversely, liberation from ta stoicheia is, Paul argues, liberation from Torah. He emphasizes, though, that the only practical point of contact between paganism and Torah in Galatians 4 his that both are bound up with calendrical observances. As J. Louis Martyn puts it, the central question in Galatians is What time is it? Paul’s answer is that “God’s own (apocalyptic) ‘time-keeping scheme’ as revealed in Christ . . . has brought an end to the ‘time-keeping schemes’ associated with ta stoicheia tou kosmou, whether by Jews or by Gentiles.”
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Thursday, August 12, 2010 at 12:55 pm
In the aforementioned article, Arnold notes that “in the Greek Magical Papyri, the term stoicheia is used most commonly in connection witht he stars and/or the spirit entities, or gods, they represent. In a related sense, stoicheia was also used to refer to the 36 astral decans that rule over every 10 degrees of the heavens. . . . Each of these astral decans could also be represented by a magical letter. Given one of the common usages of stoicheia as letters of the alphabet, it is easy to see how this usage could have arisen.” He argues that “it is quite probably that the term stoicheia was used of astral decans in the first century A.D. or prior.”
In his commentary on Revelation (Social-Science Commentary on the Book of Revelation
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Thursday, August 12, 2010 at 11:21 am
In a 1996 article in Novum Testamentum, Clinton Arnold argues that the stoicheia (“elementary principles,” Galatians 4:3 and elsewhere) are demons. His arguments in favor of a personal understanding of the stoicheia are strong if not entirely persuasive, but his argument that Paul portrays the stoicheia as entirely malevolent powers are weaker.
He notes the “Second Exodus” imagery of Galatians 4; the stoicheia are lords that enslave, lords from which Jesus and the Spirit liberate Jews and Gentiles. But in context slavery is a condition of childhood (Galatians 4:1); slavery is the condition of minority and immaturity. Calling the elemental things “weak and poor” (v. 9) doesn’t necessarily imply that they are evil, any more than saying that pre-resurrection human flesh is “weak” (1 Corinthians 15) implies that the flesh is evil. Paul says that the Galatians were slaves to what are not gods (v. 8), but that is not necessarily the fault of the idols that the Galatians worshiped. If they gave honor to guardian angels that should have been reserved for God, that’s not the angels’ fault.
Arnold is on stronger ground when he points out that the stoicheia are on the side of flesh and world in Paul’s schematization of history. The stoicheia belong to the old order of things. But so too does the Torah, and Paul thinks that the Torah, in itself, is righteous, holy, and good.
Even if Arnold is correct that the stoicheia are equivalent to personal “principalities and powers,” I’m inclined to see them in the light of the creation, fall, redemption scheme that Yoder and Walter Wink use when talking about the powers: Created by Christ, they turned against Him, but have been subjected and restored through Christ’s death and resurrection.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Thursday, August 12, 2010 at 11:04 am
I’ve posted a paper by a student, Lisa Beyeler, that traces out connections between Jeremiah and Galatians. Click on “Downloads” at the top of the page, and you’ll find it.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Wednesday, March 25, 2009 at 10:03 am
Galatians 6 is roughly organized as a chiasm:
A. Bear one another’s burdens
B. Boasting in oneself and not another
C. Sowing and reaping; flesh
D. Do good
C’. Judaizers want good show in flesh/boast in flesh
B’. Boasting only in Christ Jesus: crucified to world
A’. I bear stigmata
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, March 3, 2009 at 8:49 am
What did the Judaizers want? According to Galatians 6:12, they wanted to make a “good show” in the flesh. The verb for “making a good show” (euprosopeo) is a hapax in the NT and very rare elsewhere, but we might make a go at translating and interpreting through etymology. The word is clearly linked with prosopon, “face,” and the idea is perhaps that the Judaizers want to have “good face” through insisting that Gentiles observe circumcision and other Jewish customs. They are “saving face,” and from there you can plug into Paul’s comment all we’ve learned about honor in the ancient world from Jerome Neyrey and others.
Beyond that, the LXX uses euprosopos in Genesis 12:11 in Abram’s compliment to Sarai’s beauty. Might Paul have known that? Might the Judaizers seek “good face” by trying to claim Sarai as mother?
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, March 3, 2009 at 8:21 am
Philip Esler draws on the anthropological work of Anthony Cohen to suggest that Paul’s reference to “biting” and “devouring” may describe the actual internal life of Paul’s churches: “Anthony Cohen’s argument about the persistence of liminality among persons once they have crossed a boundary to join a new group raises the prospect that the members of the congregations had not yet internalized the values expected of them and continued to treat one another in the fiercely competitive way typical of unrelated persons in this culture. We should expect that the process of acquiring a new identity to be a a very difficult one.”
This line of argument has several advantages: First, it helps to show the coherence of Galatians. Paul hasn’t changed the subject once he gets to the beginning of chapter 5. Second, more specifically, he hasn’t changed the meaning of his terms. ”Flesh” still refers to adherents of Torah and Judaizers and those who remain under the managers and guardians; it hasn’t changed meaning to “sinful nature.” Paul’s list of “works of the flesh” describes the way of life among the false teachers.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, February 24, 2009 at 9:05 am
Paul contrasts fulfilling the law of loving neighbor with biting, devouring, and consuming. Love for neighbor is human behavior; anything else is feral.
The verb “bite” (dakno) is used only in Galatians 5:15 in the NT, and only twice in the LXX (Genesis 49:17; Deuteronomy 8:15), both references to biting snakes. Failing to fulfill the law of love is not only bestial but Satanic. Of course, he still has the Judaizers in mind, and is hinting that they are what Revelation calls a synagogue of Satan.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, February 24, 2009 at 7:59 am
Galatians 5-6 turns a number of Pauline terms inside out. After spending most of the letter polemicizing against seeking justification form the “works of the law,” Paul rehabilitates both “work” (5:6) and “law” (5:14; 6:2). After announcing that in Christ we have been freed from the Egypt of Judaic managers and tutors, he instructs us to use our freedom to become slaves to one another (5:13). He doesn’t quite rehabilitate flesh, though he has told us early on that life in the flesh can be life by faith in the Son of God, that is, life in the flesh can be lived out as life in the Spirit (2:20).
He even rehabilitates the stoicheia. ”If we live by the Spirit, by the Spirit also let us stoichomen” (5:25). The NASB translates this as “walk,” but it’s a different verb than 5:16 (peripateo). ”Keep in step” is better. However it is translated, it is a deliberate play on the “elementary principles” from which Paul says we have been freed (as is the related verb sustoichei in 4:25).
Paul is showing us that the entire old covenant is resurrected in the new. It is not the same; law is no longer the Mosaic law, work is the working of love and of the Spirit, slavery is willing service, the stoicheic pattern is now set by the Spirit and not by under-guardians. It’s not the same but it’s all there, dead and risen in Christ Jesus and his body.
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, February 24, 2009 at 7:48 am
Galatians 5-6 is organized as a chiasm, with the exhortation to bear one another’s burdens, and fulfill the law of Christ, at the center. The structure suggests that that the freedom that the Spirit grants is precisely freedom to bear the burdens of others as Christ as done for us.
A. 5:1-15: focus on issues of freedom, circumcision, and the law
B. 5:16-26: flesh and Spirit; circumcision isn’t mentioned
C. 6:1-5: bearing burdens and fulfilling law of Christ
B’. 6:6-10: sowing and reaping, with emphasis on flesh-Spirit contrast
A’. 6:11-18: circumcision and law; circumcision mentioned for the first time since beginning of ch 5
The A section is also chiastically arranged:
posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, February 24, 2009 at 5:21 am
Permission is given to use material on this site, provided the source is cited, blog entries are republished in full, and the author is notified in advance.
