Chapter 1: Introduction and Survey of Current Perspectives Introduction Overwhelmingly, scholars tend to see the Old Testament Law

primarily through the eyes of Pauls seemingly negative statements, ignoring the blatantly positive and creating a lens through which the continuity between the Old and New Testament is all but forgotten. It is the purpose of this study to do just the opposite. After a thorough investigation of the original purpose of the Law in the OT this study will explore the thesis that Paul, at the Damascus road encounter of the risen Jesus, experienced a personal reformation in regards to his view of and approach to the Law. Previous to this encounter, Paul viewed the OT Law through the lens of his pharisaical training. But, due to the revelatory nature of his encounter with the risen son of God, Paul now views and approaches the Law in line with its original OT purpose, the revelation of Gods nature and character. God, the one and the same Yahweh of the OT, revealed his Son to Paul creating continuity between the Jewish scriptures and Pauls current revelation of the risen Messiah. This introductory chapter will include a brief survey of five Pauline scholars (Sanders, Westerholm, Bird, Nanos, and Beker) each carefully chosen for their uniquely influential perspective on the topic of Paul and the Law. Current Perspectives Concerning Paul and the Law Sanders In his book Paul, the Law, and the Jewish People, Sanders paints the picture of a Jewish Paul that struggles to rectify his revelatory encounter of the risen Jesus with his own theological presuppositions (founded in his Second Temple worldview). In his pre-converted state, Paul
1

believed that the Law (along with election) was the key aspect of God's plan for salvation. He was in a situation which requires him to cast off, to deny, God's principal redemptive activities in the past: the election and the law.1 But, while Sanders has Paul cutting ties with his Second Temple Jewish understanding of Gods will for salvation, he still maintains Paul as thoroughly Jewish in most every other aspect of his character. Pauls attempt to straddle the border between his Jewishness and his new faith in Christ causes what Sanders dubs as an acute theological problem that is rooted in two absolute central convictions.2 The first is based on Paul's experience of God's personal revelation of his son, Jesus Christ. This conviction overrides Paul's past and redefines his theological worldview by setting the stage for understanding God's plan for salvation. Righteousness did not come from keeping the Law (as Paul had previously believed) so God sent Christ to save all humanity on the same basis, apart from the Law. Paul's second conviction is based on his Jewish theological assumption that God had given the Law for a specific purpose.3 In Paul's struggle to rectify this paradox, the underlying theological question focused on the function of the Law and how it is associated with the perfect will of God: What is the function of the Law if it does not save? Paul's Jewish background led him to understand that whatever happened was in accordance to divine providence; the law, then, could not be opposed to God's will; yet the law does not provide for salvation.4 So Paul, not knowing any other way to rectify this conundrum and still holding to his central conviction concerning God's perfect
1

1983), 78.
2 3 4

E.P. Sanders, Paul, the Law, and the Jewish People (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress Publishers, Ibid., 79. Ibid., 81. Ibid., 66. 2

will, connected the Law with sin in order to assign it a negative place in God's plan of salvation.5 Pauls assigning the law a negative role in Gods plan of salvation, an assignment which itself arose from his view that righteousness is only by faith in Christ and that God must have given the law with that righteousness, and not some other, ultimately in view.6 With this connection the law's divinely given function can still be explained as part of God's plan to grant the promise of salvation to his people (and everyone else sharing humanity's universal plight of being under sin). But, according to Sanders, Paul then makes a subtle but important shift in his explanation of the law's relationship with sin for the purpose of representing a consistent God. Since the Law was given by the will of God to reveal the way to righteousness but hijacked by sin and leading men to death, it produced a situation contrary to the will of God.7 Thus there is an alteration in Paul's view of the relationship between sin and God's intention.... and between God's will and the law (he gave the law to save, an intention which was frustrated, rather than with the intent to condemn). These changes seem to be required by the new role given to sin: it is now an active agent which employs the law against the purpose of God.8 But, ..sin does not pervert the intention of the law by causing people to fulfill it in the wrong way, thus producing legalism. The law, rather, is the agent of sin because it condemns and thus provokes transgression.9 In Sanders thought, the Law is still connected to sin, but sin has no connection to God's will.

5 6 7 8 9

Ibid., 66. Ibid., 84. Ibid., 73. Ibid., 73 Ibid., 74. 3

Sanders concludes his thoughts on the subject by stating: It is paradoxical, perhaps ironic, that it was Paul's attempt to hold together God's will and the negative function which his exclusivist christology led him to assign the law which finally pushed him into disassociating the result of God's giving the law from his will.10 Sanders depicts Paul as making a valiant attempt to salvage the reputation of God by putting the blame on sin and disassociating God's will from the result.11 God has failed to achieve what he originally willed the function of the Law to accomplish (to be followed by his people and lead them to life). Sin uses the Law against the will of God and the weakness of the created order could not accomplish its requirements, rendering the Law (and subsequently God's will) ineffective. But, with the coming of Christ, God has rectified his first attempt and provided salvation not just to the Jews, but also to Gentiles. Pauls thinking is governed by the overriding conviction that salvation is through Christ. Since Christ came to save all, all needed salvation.12 Sanders represents a uniquely controversial new perspective within Pauline Studies. To his credit, he does try to hold Pauls Jewish background into account as he works through Pauls view of the Law. But, in presenting a Paul that is torn between the two conceptual worlds of Second Temple Judaism and his newfound faith in Jesus Christ, Sanders fails to see the value of the Law in the OT as well as its revelatory purpose. In effect, he fails to differentiate between the Second Temple Jewish view of the Law and the OT view of the Law, limiting his perspective to what the Law has become in its ethnocentric form (see below). It is this ethnocentric form of the

10 11 12

Ibid., 85. Ibid., 85. Ibid., 68. 4

Law that Paul breaks from as he rediscovers the original revelatory purpose of the Law as given in the OT. In Sanders view, Gods will is divorced from his presence and action on behalf of his chosen people. In actuality, Gods will is held firm by his presence and not able to be manipulated by sin. Rather than straddling the two conceptual worlds of Judaism and belief in Christ, Sanderss Paul falls into the gap, rendering Gods will as something that can be manipulated by sin into serving a different purpose than it was originally intended to. Westerholm Stephen Westerholm presents Paul as a man steeped in the Second Temple Judaism of his day but, due to his encounter with the risen Christ, Paul engages in a Christian reevaluation of his own human predicament. Through this reevaluation Paul discovers that the Law itself does not make him (or anyone else, either Jew or Gentile) righteous before God. Drawing extensively from the tradition of Second Temple Judaism, Paul delves into this reevaluation as he reflects on the disclosure of the human predicament implicit in the cross of Christ.13 During this process, Westerholm claims that Paul experienced a plot twist when considering the sinfulness of humanity in the light of the cross (the climax of the story) and subsequently had to engage in a further reevaluate of the function of the Law in Gods plan for salvation. Paul, who once pursued the righteousness of the Law, could only make a distinction between this kind of righteousness and the righteousness of faith when reconsidering Scripture in the process of a Christian reevaluation. These convictions were only available to him when the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ were believed to be both efficacious for human

13 Stephen. Westerholm, Sinai as Viewed From Damascus : Pauls Reevaluation of the Mosaic Law, in Road From Damascus, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1997), 157.

redemption and revelatory of the inadequacy of earlier institutions- even divine institutions- to achieve such end.14 Due to his new understanding of the efficacy of the cross of Christ, Paul engages in a polemic against what was once his former understanding of the Law in Gods plan of salvation, that one could obtain/earn righteousness through human effort. Throughout his argument, Westerholm pays particular attention the the Pauline phrase works of the law.15 By using this phrase, Paul calls his audience to a broader understanding of more than just the ritual prescriptions of the Law. In fact, the Law itself becomes a launching pad for the discussion concerning Pauls conviction that no human work can make an individual righteous.16 Even though these works were demanded by Israels particularism, work can still have nothing to do with election. The idea that any kind of work would have part in the process of divine election would run counter to what God is accomplishing in his gracious act of election. God has determined to act through his gracious election and the very nature of this act pragmatically excludes consideration of human endeavor.17

14 15

Ibid., 161.

Westerholms discussions of the phrase works of the law mainly focus on Gal. 2:16 Stephen Westerholm, Perspectives Old and New on Paul: The Lutheran Paul and His Critics (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003), 152-153. and Rom. 9:11-12 Stephen Westerholm, Paul and the Law in Romans 9-11, in Paul and the Mosaic Law, ed. James D. G. Dunn, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000), 228-229.
16 Stephen Westerholm, Perspectives Old and New on Paul: The Lutheran Paul and His Critics (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003), 152-153. In Westerholms discussion of Rom. 9:11-12 he states: To be sure, the works preformed by Israel are those prescribed by the Mosaic law; but nothing in this passage suggests that Israel is pursuing the wrong kind of works. What is emphatically excluded is consideration of any human work in the granting of divine favor (9:12); an exclusion which naturally includes the particular works enjoined by Moses. Stephen Westerholm, Paul and the Law in Romans 9-11, in Paul and the Mosaic Law, ed. James D. G. Dunn, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000), 228. 17 Stephen Westerholm, Paul and the Law in Romans 9-11, in Paul and the Mosaic Law, ed. James D. G. Dunn, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000), 229.

For Westerholms Paul, the cross of Christ is not only efficacious in contrast with any human effort (including but not limited to that associated with the Law) but it also revealed the inadequacy of the Law for human redemption.18 Paul now views the Law, in light of the cross, as the agent which serves to highlight human bondage to sin while at the same time exacerbating the human condition.19 In fact, Westerholm goes so far as to claim that the primary purpose of the Law is to compel recognition of the nature and extent of human sinfulness.20 This recognition serves to remind man of his place in creation and his responsibility to the Creator God, a responsibility that elicits outright rebellion against God. The Law itself, because it is Gods stated will, then becomes culpable for transforming sin into deliberate transgression of this will as it highlights the unwillingness, as well as the incapacity, of man to accomplish what God desires of his creation. In and of itself, the Law was never equipped to overcome human sinfulness but it fulfills its original purpose by showing human sinfulness to be, in Westerholms words, exceedingly sinful.21 Despite Westerholms seemingly negative view on the Law, he still holds that the Law, through its afore mentioned revelation of the sinfulness of man, served a preparatory role to the revelation of Gods righteousness in Jesus Christ.

Gods design for the law must have been, in part, to go on record as demanding what is holy and righteous and good, but also (indeed, even more) to demonstrate the rebellious character of humanity in Adam through the shortcomings of the most privileged segment of Adamic humanity. Paradoxically, then, the righteousness demanded by the law can
18 Stephen Westerholm, Perspectives Old and New on Paul: The Lutheran Paul and His Critics (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003), 161. 19 20 21

Ibid., 157. Ibid., 157. Ibid., 157. 7

only be obtained apart from the law, by faith in Christ. But since the the law had a divine role to play until Christ came, since it demonstrated the culpability of humanity from which Christ brought redemption, it can be said to have been pointing all along to Christ.22 Westerholm represents a typical Lutheran/Old Perspective approach to Pauline Studies. He is right to recognize the revelatory purpose of the Law but he, like Sanders, fails to understand the original purpose of the Law as revelatory of Gods nature and character in the OT. Throughout Westerholms argument he places a high value on the holiness and righteousness of God, the Law giver. Yet, the Holy God, who has manifested his presence among his people in conjunction with the giving of the Law, seems (according to Westerholm) to negate his own will by allowing the Law to primarily (and overwhelmingly) reveal the sinfulness of man. Westerholms understanding that through the revelation of the sinfulness of man, man will somehow be able to understand the holiness of God seems to ascribe a spiritual discernment only available through the presence of God in relationship. Westerholms Paul would have us believe that the primary purpose of the Law was to burden the people of Israel with an inescapable sinfulness. Yet, the OT itself speaks of the Righteous God dwelling in the midst of a sinful people (see below discussion in Chapter 2). Although most of Westerholms work is in and of itself a polemic against the adherents to the new perspective, he continues to have the same core problem that Sanders faces when explaining how the will of God can be held separate from his presence. Bird

22 Stephen Westerholm, Paul and the Law in Romans 9-11, in Paul and the Mosaic Law, ed. James D. G. Dunn, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000), 234.

Michael Bird finds a middle ground between Sanders and Westerholm by tackling Paul's view of the Law from an eschatological perspective.23 Bird's Paul recognized before and after his conversion that Christ and the Law are mutual exclusive. For Paul, obedience to the torah cannot be pursued as the means of attaining membership in the people of God and, therefore, the grounds upon which God will vindicate believers.24 Paul is not confronting legalism or nomism, rather, according to Bird, he confronts an ethnocentric nomism. Ethnocentric nomism is the view that Jewish identity is the locus of salvation (hence ethnocentric) and one must preform the law so as to enter the Jewish constituency and be vindicated in the eschaton (hence nomistic).25 This is different from legalism in that the works preformed are done within a covenantal framework that defines the identity of the people of God. It is different from covenantal nomism because the desired end state is not just covenantal status but eschatological salvation. In Bird's, view the post-conversion Paul understood the Law to be only effective in and regulated to the pre-Christ epoch. Paul's view turns out to be decidedly negative as its main purpose was to act as God's agent during this epoch and serve as a part of a triangle of forces consisting of law-sindeath, a triangle that brings condemnation on both Jews and Gentiles.26 But as a national charter for Israel, the Law temporarily limited salvation to Israel, while God's original covenantal plan to save all nations was given through Abraham. 27
23 Bird agrees with the idea of variegated nomism, as it underscores the diversity within the different sects of Judaism and can accommodate a wider range of beliefs concerning the role of the law than covenantal nomism. Michael F. Bird, Justification as Forensic Declaration and Covenant Membership: A Via Media Between Reformed and Revisionist Readings of Paul, Tyndale Bulletin 57, no. 1 (2006): 112.

Michael F. Bird, Justification as Forensic Declaration and Covenant Membership: A Via Media Between Reformed and Revisionist Readings of Paul, Tyndale Bulletin 57, no. 1 (2006): 113.
25 26

24

Ibid.

Michael F. Bird, Introducing Paul: The Man, His Mission and His Message (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2009), 139.
27

Ibid. 9

This leads Bird to three conclusions concerning the purpose of the Law. (1) To highlight the holiness of God and the severity of sin.28 God wanted his people to understand that they lived in a moral universe and that he himself was not morally indifferent, therefore he chose Israel to reflect the glory of God in the presence of the nations through the covenantal life of their community.29 (2) To be a temporary administration of Gods grace to govern his people. It functioned to set Israel apart from the nations and cocoon Gods promises around them for a time30 until the coming of the promised seed of Abe who would bring the Gentiles into Gods covenant family.31 (3)To foreshadow and introduce the coming of Jesus Christ...When he came, he would save people from the condemnation of the law (Rom. 3:21-22; 1 Cor 5:7; 10:3; Col. 2:17).32 Bird holds that by sending his Son and his Spirit, God accomplished what the Law could not do enable Jews and Gentiles alike to live righteously for him and be counted righteous before him. Bird rightly identifies the Law as part of the previous epoch/age and its service as the theological charter for the nation of Israel. He is also correct in giving value to the Law as revelatory of the holiness of God, a holiness that the people themselves represent to the surrounding nations. Birds ethnocentric nomism provides a great description of the function of the Law in Second Temple Judaism but, he fails to take into account the evolution from its original OT theocentric purpose to its ethnocentric state. Bird also seems to partake in a fundamental misunderstanding of the Law as temporary administrator of Gods grace. Rather, the
28 29 30 31 32

Ibid., 139-140. Ibid., 139-140. Ibid., 140. Ibid. Ibid. 10

Law was never designed to do this in and of itself. Grace in the OT was intimately associated with the presence of God. The Law itself held no soteric value (as Paul explicitly states in Gal. 2:21, see discussion in Chapter 3) this was Gods work on behalf of his people, a work based on his nature and character. Nanos Nanos views Paul as a typical monotheistic Law following Second Temple Jew who understood the covenantal background that God had initiated as still viable for the Jewish decedents of Abraham. This covenantal background flows through the history of Israel to the giving of the Law which defines behavior extending from the thoughts of the heart to the acts of the hands.33 In fact, Nanos advocates that one of the main teachings of the Law is freedom, the same kind of freedom that Paul speaks about which believers have in Christ. This same idea of freedom is the heart behind core elements of Judaism i.e. the celebration of Sabbath and many of the commands about the treatment of others and animals. Responsibility to God and others is magnified in Torah because of this freedom.34 For Nanos, only one aspect of Paul's view on the Torah changed at his conversion, its association with Gentiles. Paul understood that the resurrection of the Christ and the coming of the Holy Spirit initiated the age for which the Jewish people had been wanting for, when all Gentile nations would recognize Israel's God as the one true God, creator of all humankind. In this age, Christ-following non-Jews are obligated to bear witness to the righteousness expressed in Torah, that is, the love of God and neighbor, but as representatives of the other nations, and

33

122.
34

Mark Nanos, Locating Paul on a Map of First-Century Judaism, SBL Annual Meeting (Nov. 22, 2010): Ibid., 123. 11

not as members of Israel and her Mosaic covenant. This age represents the fulfillment of God's covenant with Abraham, bringing blessing to all of the nations through his seed.35 Nanos holds that Paul never advocated for the end of Torah following. Rather, Paul did teach that Gentile believers were not to become Jews, nor be under the Torah in the same manner that Jews had always been and still remained. 36 Paul himself continued to follow the Torah as a matter of faith and viewed himself as a faithful Jewish believer in Christ. Rather than advocating for a break with Judaism and the Law, Paul defended his spiritual heritage claiming that the coming of Christ actually established the law's validity through Christ's fulfillment.37 For Nanos Paul, the issue of membership for the non-Jews in the Jewish politicoreligious community (without becoming ethnicity Jewish) was the main reason he authored his letters to the Gentile communities. This mixing of different people while retaining their different religio-ethnic identities and thus different relationships to Torah confused some of his original audiences, provoking him to write letters intended to clarify this proposition, but they have misled later interpreters reading his instructions to non-Jews in particular as if universal truths Paul applied without distinction to every person, including Jews. 38 Nanos represents a minority of vocal scholars in Pauline studies that advocate for a completely Jewish Paul (before and after the road to Damascus experience).39 He is correct in

35 36

Ibid., 128-129.

Mark Nanos, The Myth of the Law Free Paul Standing Between Christians and Jews, Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations 4, (2009): 3.
37 38

Ibid., 3. Ibid., 3.

39 for more on the Jewish perspective: See e.g., Pamela Michelle Eisenbaum, Paul Was Not a Christian: The Real Message of a Misunderstood Apostle (New York: HarperOne, 2009); Paula Fredriksen, "Judaizing the Nations: The Ritual Demands of Paul's Gospel," New Testament Studies 56 (2010): 232-52.

12

advocating that the coming of the Jewish Messiah initiated a new eschatological age when the God of Israel would be worshiped by Jew and Gentile alike. Nanos also serves as a helpful reminder of Pauls continued stance concerning the practice of the Law as a Jewish follower of Christ. But, Nanos fails to understand the break that Paul advocates from the halakhah Law that has been created within the Rabbinic tradition. The idea, advocated by Nanos, that Paul would confuse his followers with preaching in regards to their distinct religio-ethnic identities is extremely unhelpful in light of Pauls explanation of the presence of the Spirit of God in their midst. This seems to be an interpretive presupposition for Nanos rather than an idea born out of an exegetical study of the text. Rather, Pauls preaching transcends the idea of religio-ethnic boundaries as he advocates for their spiritual identity as sons of Abraham, an identity consistent with the OT idea of the presence of God (see chapter 3). Beker Beker, in his book Paul the Apostle, identifies the crucial exegetical issue as whether Paul argues for the abrogation of the law or for a continuing validity of the law in the gospel40 He believes that a middle ground between the legitimate speculation about Paul's pre-conversion past and the pure theological exposition of Pauls theological position can be found by taking an in-depth look at Paul's experience of the risen Christ. When scholarship concentrates solely on Pauls theological exposition of the law, it overlooks the distinction between faith and its theological expression and thus overlooks the matrix of Pauls theology of the law in his own experience.41 Understanding the reason that Paul became an ardent follower of Christ is

40 41

Johan C. Beker, Paul the Apostle (Augsburg: Fortress Publishers, 2000), 236. Ibid., 237. 13

exclusively located in the facticity of the Christophany helps clear up the obscurity regarding Paul's pre-conversion Pharisaic convictions.42 Beker argues that delving further into Paul's attested Christophany shows that the underlying coherence of Paul's view of the Law finds its source in the radicalization of the Jewish position on the evil impulse and sin.43 In Judaism, sin can be dealt with through the prescribed sacrificial system but, for the post-conversion Paul, a sinful act leads to bondage under the power of sin and subsequently into the human plight44 Beker attributes this radicalization of sin to Pauls new understanding of God's plan of salvation due to his encounter with Christ (the Christophany). Because Christ atoned on the cross for our sins, committed under the law, he not only unmasked sins as the power of death but also defeated that power of sin in his death and resurrection.45 Henceforth the function of Gods holy Law was taken up and absorbed by Christ in whom the just requirement of the law was fulfilled (Rom. 8:4) and its deadly function under sin was abrogated.46 Paul's newly understood fulfillment of the Law, through Christ, lead him to emphasize the discontinuous character of the Christ-event in conjunction with Gods continuous salvationhistorical command.47 The Law was preforming its function of revealing sin and sealing the fate of humanity (death), when Christ came and rearranged God's plan of salvation under and according to himself. The laws positive function in salvation-history is not only because it
42 43 44 45 46 47

Ibid. Ibid., 243. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. Ibid., 244. 14

makes sin accountable before God (Rom. 4:15; 5:13) but also because it holds the whole range of history together in the plan of God.48 In short, Beker posits that Law is not a supernatural mistake or a tragic flaw, because of it's role in making sin accountable to God. 49 The law's purpose was not ultimate damnation but it confirms the unity of salvation history by demonstrating God's will to save.50 Consequently, as Paul works through his arguments about the Law he now views the unity of salvation history eschatologically and not protologically. Rather than understanding Gods election from the beginning of the world he now deduces Gods election and predestination from his eschatological vindication.51 The function of the Law is viewed retrospectively and not prospectively. To engage in works of the Law is equivalent to being misdirected and following sin's deceptive instrument.52 Now, because Christ is the fulfillment of the Law and love is the fulfilling of the Law, the works that followers of Christ take part in have a new focus, love. This focus leads Beker's Paul to refer to these works as doing the law of Christ, which in turn makes the Christians work transparent to Gods redemptive purpose.53 But Beker's Paul is not just content with radicalizing the Jewish position on sin, he also is a revolutionary in that he radicalizes the issue of law and gospel: lawless Gentiles are full members of the people of God by faith alone. Paul ruptures the connection between Torah and Christ so decisively that Jewish life as such is invalidated. He interprets adherence to the law in
48 49 50 51 52 53

Ibid. Ibid. Ibid., 244-245. Ibid., 245. Ibid., 246. Ibid., 247. 15

all its forms as a rebuilding of those things which I tore down (Gal. 2:18). This rupture between Torah and Christ establishes the equality of Jew and Gentile because the dividing wall of the Torah is torn down. Paul then, despite his understanding of the inspiration and authority of scripture, sets up Christ as the hermeneutical key to all further interpretation of Jewish scripture. In effect, for Beker, Christ becomes the cannon within the cannon, even to the extreme that Paul quotes scripture against scripture to prove his point. Bekers understanding is valuable in that he attempts to uncover the positive view of the Law through an in-depth look at Pauls Damascus road Christophany. His eschatological perspective is helpful in focusing Pauls view of the Law from a post-conversion standpoint as Paul explains Jew and Gentile relationship in the new age/epoch. But, as Beker seeks to explain how Christs fulfillment of the Law invalidates the Jewish life he fails to take into account the OT understanding of the purpose of the Law to reveal Gods nature and character. Beker also attribute a striking inconsistency to Gods will. God begins by condemning man through the Law then changing his mind and saving the people from this condemnation with by the sending of his Son. Beker also fails to consider that the Christophany could cause anything other than an extreme break from Pauls Jewish past. Conclusion As can be seen through this brief sample of Pauline scholarship, each author approaches the person of Paul and the concept of the Law from very different perspectives. As thorough as some of the explanations and exegesis may be, all of the authors mentioned (and the majority of Pauline scholarship) fail discuss a few concepts that are essential in understanding exactly what Paul is trying to communicate concerning the Law in the letter to the Galatians. The majority of

16

these scholars fail to different the thoroughly ethnocentric approach to the Law within Second Temple Jewish from the original theocentric purpose of the Law found in the OT. My understanding of the ethnocentric form of the Law differs from Birds ethnocentric nomism in one very important aspect: I would hold that an ethnocentric approach to the Law consists of a distortion of its original theocentric purpose, the revelation of Gods nature and character. In its ethnocentric form, the Law has become so intermingled with and interpreted through halahkah tradition and pagan culture that it has become centralized on the action of man. Approaching the Law in an ethnocentric manner, a manner consistent with our understanding of Second Temple Judaism, removes it from the context of the promised blessing of Gods presence (Gen. 12) and serves to promote both legalism and ethnic superiority in their various forms. As this thesis moves forward, it is with the intention to explore the original purpose of the Law as originated in the promise given to Abraham (Gen.12). Chapter 2 will focus on the understanding that God has chosen to reveal his nature and character through the manifestation of his presence and the declaration of his will. Chapter 3 will explore these concepts in Pauls letter to the Galatians for the express purpose of exploring our main thesis: Due to Pauls revelatory encounter with the Son of God, he now views and approaches the Law in line with its original OT purpose, the revelation of Gods nature and character.

17

Chapter 2: The Revelation of Yahwehs Nature and Character in the Old Testament Genesis 12 While Genesis 12 begins the story of Abraham (then Abram) with the experience of Yahweh's call, the story of Abraham really begins with his father Terah, a descendent of Noah, from the line of Shem, leaving the land of Ur en route to the land of Canaan (Gen. 11:27-32). The biblical text does not indicate what motivated Terah to move his family towards Canaan, nor does it explain the reason he discontinued his journey and settled in Haran. It does however set the stage for Abram, along with his wife Sarai, to continue the Biblical narrative concerning the line of the righteous Noah. Abram, descendant of Shem, is now the inheritor of the blessing uttered by Noah concerning his sons, Blessed be Yahweh, the God of Shem; and let Canaan be his servant. May God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem, and let Canaan be his servant (Gen. 9:26-27). We can only assume that this legacy of blessing was an integral part of the tradition handed down from father to son, and the awareness of the personal name of God, Yahweh, was an important part of that tradition. So, when Yahweh speaks to Abram in Gen. 12, we need not wonder if Abram knew who was giving the command. Yahweh, the God of Abram's forefathers and source of the blessing of his family, commands and Abram obeys. But what does this command entail and what part does the following promise play in Yahweh's revelation of his nature and character? Before being able to consider the implications of the command given, we first must consider its source. It is extremely important to understand that although Abram is the primary human character in the sub-narrative that begins in Gen. 12, Yahweh, who has been the divine

18

subject throughout the entire Genesis narrative, continues to be so throughout the story of Abraham and his descendants.54 While many commentators focus on Abram and his obedience to the divine call, I would posit that they miss the point of the narrative, namely that Yahweh has commanded Abram to act in conjunction with a promise that finds its basis in his divine nature and character. Abram's obedience is an important part of the story but what the narrator has primarily in view is the establishment of the promise as the foundation for Yahwehs self-revelation. Abram, as well as his descendants after him, will experience the further revelation of Yahwehs nature and character through a direct encounter with and the continuation of Yahweh's divine presence. This in turn prepares Abram and his descendants for the purpose of serving as a revelatory vehicle to all nations. They will be an important part of Yahweh's systematic self-revelation through which all nations will be blessed.55 So, with the understanding that Yahweh is the divine subject of the narrative, we must now focus on the question at hand: How does Yahweh reveal his nature and character through the foundational promise given to Abram? The promise of Gen. 12:1-3 includes two divine imperatives given by Yahweh: (1) Go and (2) that you may be a blessing.56 The significance of these divine imperatives cannot be
54 Yahweh is the subject of the first verb at the beginning of the first statement and thus the subject of the entire subsequent history. Gerhard Von Rad, Genesis, a Commentary (Old Testament Library), Revised ed. (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1973), 159. Von Rad is correct when he states that there is no indication of an internal struggle of faith or a criticism of the religions of his father (as later in the Apocalypse of Abraham), the focus is on Yahweh, he has commanded and Abram listens. the Yahwist understands Abraham here merely as the object of a divine command. Ibid., 162.

55 cf. John H. Walton, Covenant (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994), 24-46. Walton understands this revelation to take place through the means of covenant. 56 Allen P. Ross, Genesis, Exodus (Cornerstone Biblical Commentary) (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Pub., 2008), 95.

19

understated. Here, Yahweh is commanding an action and promising a result based solely on his own ability to bring this result to fruition. Abram will go to the land he will be shown, he will be made a great nation and his name will be great. None of these accolades are predicated on Abrams action. All of these things will be accomplished on Abrams behalf in accordance with the nature and character of Yahweh. Yahweh promises with his own words that he will show Abram the land, make Abram a great nation, bless ( )Abram and make his name great. It is Yahweh who will do all of these things for the purpose of fulfilling his second divine imperative, so that you will be a blessing.57 The divine imperatives of v. 1 and v. 2 bookend Yahwehs promised action on behalf of Abram rooting the promise in his own divine nature and character while laying the foundation for his further self-revelation through his action on Abrams behalf. Yahwehs action, and nothing else, brings these promises to fruition. Yahweh's promise to Abram continues to unfold in v. 3 as the second divine imperative that you may be a blessing ( ) is further explained. I will bless those who bless you, and him who dishonors you I will curse, and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed. (emphasis mine). The wording of these promises is precise. The first uses the cohorative construction of the verb that stresses God's determination or resolve, and the object, the participle, is a plural form; I am determined to bless all those who bless you.58 But what exactly does Yahweh mean by the promised blessing? In order to answer this important

Based in the use of the imperatives in this passages, Sailhammer concludes that: The purpose of God's call is not only that Abraham might become a great nation, but also that he might be a blessing. John H. Sailhammer, Walter C. Kaiser Jr, and Richard Hess, The Expositors Bible Commentary: Genesis-Leviticus, Revised ed. (Zondervan, 2008), 156.
58 Allen P. Ross, Genesis, Exodus (Cornerstone Biblical Commentary) (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Pub., 2008), 95.

57

20

question we must jump ahead a bit in the narrative and visit the paradigmatic expression of blessing in the Torah, the priestly blessing of Num. 6:22-27. Numbers 6:22-27 as the Paradigmatic Blessing of Torah Num. 6:22-27 describes, what I believe to be, the paradigm through which the concept of the blessing of Yahwehs presence is understood in the context of the Pentateuch.59 Here, Yahweh specifically commands Moses (who is to tell Aaron) to bless ( )the people of Israel with specific words relating to his presence among them. It is important to remember that this is a prescribed blessing from Yahweh. Aaron (Israels first the Chief Priest) and his sons (the future leaders of the Levitical priestly caste) are specifically chosen to lead the people of Israel in the detailed and clearly defined worship of Yahweh. Yahweh himself, connects this priestly blessing with the reminder of his continued presence, defining what his blessing truly is. The LORD spoke to Moses, saying, Speak to Aaron and his sons, saying, Thus you shall bless the people of Israel: you shall say to them, The Lord bless you and keep you; the Lord make his face to shine upon you and be gracious to you; the Lord lift up his countenance upon you and give you peace. So shall they put my name upon the people of Israel, and I will bless them (Num 6:22-27, emphasis mine) While the space for a complete exegetical discussion of this paradigm of blessing is not available,60 a few salient points connecting the presence of Yahweh and the blessing of Num. 6:22-27 are important to point out. First, this is a declaration by Yahweh himself, not a manmade blessing that references the God of the Israelites. It was given by Yahweh to become a part

59 cf. J. McKeown, Blessings and Curses, in Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch (the IVP Bible Dictionary Series), ed. T. Desmond Alexander and David W. Baker, (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2002), 85. 60 cf. Patrick D. Miller, Blessing of God : An Interpretation of Numbers 6:22-27, Interpretation 29, no. 3 (1975): 240 - 251. and Elmer A. Martens, Intertext Messaging: Echoes of the Aaronic Blessing (Numbers 6:24-26), Direction 38, no. 2 (2009): 163 - 178.

21

of the worship of the people of Israel, a worship that continued into the Second Temple period and beyond. Second, this declaration concerns the nature of Israel's relationship with Yahweh, from the perspective of Yahweh. Yahweh's role of blesser and keeper serves to connect the promised blessing of Gen. 12 and the covenant of Gen. 15. As we have discussed, Yahweh's nature and character are the foundation of his promised blessing. As we will discuss, the Abrahamic covenant is predicated on Yahweh and continues solely because of Yahwehs action in accordance with revealed his nature and character. Thirdly, the explanation that Yahweh will make his face to shine upon you and Yahweh will lift up his countenance upon you are both strong indications of Yahweh's presence among his people. The results of Yahweh's actions, peace ( )and grace ( )are both concepts only found in the presence of Yahweh. 61 Finally, Yahweh ends his command to Moses with the explanation that in preforming this blessing, Aaron and his sons will be putting the name of Yahweh upon the people of Israel, something that the people already bear as a revelation of the presence of Yahweh among them (see below). All of these factors leads us to understand that the priestly blessing served as a confirmation of what Yahweh has already done and an explanation of what he will continue to do. The blessing, spoken by Aaron on Yahwehs behalf, was to serve as a worshipful reminder
Yahweh is the giver of peace. In this respect the Aaronic blessing of Num. 6:24-26 is most important in the Pentateuch. This prayer shows that peace from God is linked with blessing, preservation or protection, and grace. Peace is enjoyed in Yahwehs presence. Similarly, in Gen. 28:19-22 Jacobs prayer for peace is based on his experience of Gods presence. The Bible goes on to show the ultimately Gods provision for restitution for sin makes such peace possible. P.A. Barker, Rest, Peace, in Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch (the Ivp Bible Dictionary Series), ed. T. Desmond Alexander and David W. Baker, (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2002), 691. John I. Durham, Shalom and the Presence of God, in Proclamation and Presence : Old Testament Essays in Honour of Gwynne Henton Davies, ed. John I. Durham and J. R. Porter, (Richmond : John Knox Press, 1970). 22
61

that Yahweh was and would continue to be present among his people. The concept of Yahwehs divine blessing itself is so intimately connected to the divine presence of Yahweh that the two are virtually inseparable. The blessing that is promised in Gen. 12 flows from the presence of Yahweh among his people. Land, seed, Abram's name becoming synonymous with greatness and a great nation, will all come to fruition because of Yahweh's action as he is present in Abrams life and the life of Abrams descendants. As stated before, Yahweh's determination to bless Abram reveals that he is the foundation and source for any blessing that Abram will incur. In fact, I would posit that the primary blessing being promised to Abram in Gen. 12 is none other than the continued presence of Yahweh among his people. This is important to remember as we move through the narrative. Any action that Yahweh takes on behalf of Abram points directly back to Yahwehs active presence with Abram and his determination to continue to be a blessing to Abram. This is more than just a concern for Abram's welfare.62 Rather, as Yahweh is recognized as the source of Abrams fortunate circumstances, he, in effect, reveals his nature and character to Abram and everyone Abram encounters in the narrative. Yahweh's determination to bless Abram with his divine presence is a determination rooted solely on his nature and character and not on the action of Abram. This will become especially evident as the narrative progresses. The Promise and Abrams Seed Following Yahwehs declaration of blessing, Abram (along with his wife Sarai, and his nephew Lot) passes through the land of Canaan. Here, Yahweh appears to Abram a second time,
Wenham says that 12:3 employs the first person (I will bless/I shall curse) instead of the impersonal passive participles (blessed/curses) found in parallel passages (27:29; Num. 24:9) He thinks it emphasizes concern for Abram's welfare. Retribution and justice are not left to the impersonal operation of fate. The LORD himself will actively intervene on Abram's side. Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1-15, (Word Biblical Commentary), vol. 1 (Thomas Nelson, 1987), 276. 23
62

further explaining a facet of the promise, this time specifically including a mention of Abram's offspring. To your seed I will give this land (12:7, my translation). Here, in conjunction with some sort of experience with Yahweh's presence, Yahweh's nature and character are again revealed to Abram as Yahweh states that the line of Abram will continue through Abrams own seed ( .)The main thrust of the passage seems to focus on the promise that Abram will become a great nation (12:2a) through Yahwehs ability to overcome the current state of Sarais bareness. The land itself seems to be a secondary matter in that it serves as an illustrative backdrop for Yahwehs explanation of his extraordinary ability to continue the line of Abram through Abrams own seed. In response to the word of Yahweh, Abram builds an altar, probably in competition with the other gods of the land in the already designated holy space of the Oak of Moreh. Interestingly, with the building of this altar, Abram seems to take part in the revelation of God's nature and character to the surrounding nations. Ross understands Abram's action of building an altar and calling on the name of Yahweh as similar to Yahwehs self-revelation in Ex 34:5-7. [Yahweh] descended in the cloud and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name of [Yahweh]. [Yahweh] passed before him and proclaimed, [Yahweh], [Yahweh], a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children and the childrens children, to the third and the fourth generation. By building this altar, Abram distinguishes his worship from the worship of the Cannanites and, in effect, proclaims the nature and character of Yahweh through this distinction.63

63 Allen P. Ross, Genesis, Exodus (Cornerstone Biblical Commentary) (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Pub., 2008), 98.

24

In the next section of chapter 12 (vv. 10-20), Yahweh again takes center stage as he acts according to his promise in an encounter with the Egyptian Pharaoh. During his sojourn in the land of Egypt, Abram fears for his life because of the beauty of Sarai and the self-interest of the Egyptian ruler. With little regard to the promise of Yahweh, Abram disguises Sarai's identity and allows her to be taken as a concubine into the court of Pharaoh. Here, facer of Yahwehs promise is in jeopardy of not being fulfilled. Without a wife Abram would not be able to conceive an offspring.64 Also, and most importantly, Abram was dishonored by Pharaoh and Pharaoh encountered the promised curse of 12:3. God's action of testing Pharaoh and his house with great affliction and plagues on account of Sarai, the wife of Abram, is a prime example of his action according to the promise given to Abram. Yahweh, who is present with Abram in Egypt, is able to actively work on Abrams behalf despite the protection and security the pagan gods are supposed to afford the Egyptian king. Yahweh does this despite Abram's lack of trust that Yahweh would be able to protect him in a foreign land. Wenham explains Yahwehs actions towards Pharaoh by pointing out the difference between the Hebrew words for curse and disdain. Traditional English translations fail to bring out the difference between these words, usually translating both curse. However, ( )disdain generally covers illegitimate verbal assaults on God or one's superiors e.g., Ex. 21:17; Lev 24:11; 2 Sam 16:5-13, whereas the latter term refers to a judicial curse pronounced on evildoers (3:14,17; 9:25; Deut 27:15-26).65 Pharaoh's actions not only

64 In this way chapter 12 sets the tone for the next ten chapters as advance and jeopardy are intertwined. God will demonstrate again and again his ability to overcome obstacles and resolve jeopardy as he fulfills promises and provides what is necessary for the covenant to move forward. John H. Walton, Genesis (The NIV Application Commentary) (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2001), 398. 65

Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1-15, (Word Biblical Commentary), vol. 1 (Word Books, 1987), 276. 25

dishonored Abram but they were also a direct affront to Yahweh. How Pharaoh discovered the truth of Sarais relationship to Abram is not related in the narrative but neither is Pharaoh's understanding of the source of the affliction and plagues. The fact that Pharaoh did not kill Abram outright (fulfilling Abram's original fears of his impending death at the hands of the Egyptian ruler), keep Sarai as his concubine, or even revoke the gifts given to Abram shows that Pharaoh did make some sort of connection between Abram and the power behind him.66 In the circumstances surrounding Abrams sojourn to Egypt, we find Yahweh acting in accordance with his promise to Abram, despite the faithlessness of Abram. Abram, whether attempting to help the promise of Yahweh become fulfilled through the preservation of his own life or due to a complete lack of faith in Yahweh's ability to operate outside of the promised land and among the powerful Egyptian gods, acted contrary to the promise made to him. Yet, Yahweh, for the purpose of fulfilling a promise that was based on his own nature and character, acted on Abrams behalf. He preserved Abram's life, rescued Abram's wife, revealed his power to Pharaoh (a power that exceeded the protection of the Egyptian gods), and even used the Egyptian ruler to increase Abram's possessions. In short, Yahweh made his presence known through his actions on behalf of Abram, revealing to Abram, as well as the Egyptians, that it is in his nature and character to be true to the promise he has given, despite Abrams efforts to assist Yahweh in the process. Genesis 15 Yahweh's program self-revelation continues in Gen. 15 as he reveals his nature and character through: (1) three foundational revelatory statements concerning his relational

66 Claus Westermann, Genesis 12-36 (Continental Commentaries) (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 1995), 166.

26

presence, (2) the clarification of his intention concerning Abram's progeny, and (3) the declaration of his continued presence with Abram and his descendants. It is also important to note that each of the ways Yahweh chooses to reveal his nature and character are intimately linked to the promise of Gen. 12. Using the promise as the foundation for his continued presence, Yahweh continues his program of self-revelation as he manifests his presence to Abram in the covenant ceremony of vv. 7-21. Three Foundational Revelatory Statements Chapter 15 begins with the word of Yahweh coming to Abram in a vision. Fear not, Abram, I am your shield; your reward shall be very great (15:1). These three seemingly simple statements provide us with valuable insight into Yahwehs relational presence in Abrams life. They provide an explanation for Yahwehs past action on Abrams behalf as well as prepare Abram for the impending encounter with Yahwehs manifest presence. All of this based on Yahwehs promise given in 12:2b, I will bless you and make your name great. Fear Not It is important to note that Yahweh's command to fear not ( )appears here for the first time in the book of Genesis. The word for fear ( )has made an appearance only once before when it is used by Adam to describe his own reaction to the impending presence of Yahweh in the Garden of Eden (Gen. 3:10). And they heard the sound of [Yahweh] God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of [Yahweh] God among the trees of the garden. But [Yahweh] God called to the man and said to him, Where are you? And he said, I heard the sound of you in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked, and I hid myself. (3:8-10, emphasis mine)

27

An excellent case has been made by Jeffery Niehaus that the Hebrew word for day could be translated storm due to a similar cognate in Akkadian. Niehaus reinterprets v. 8 as follows: Then the man and his wife heard the thunder of Yahweh God as he was going back and forth in the garden in the wind of the storm, and they hid from Yahweh God among the trees of the garden.67 This interpretation would explain Adam's response to Yahweh, I heard the sound of you in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked, and I hid myself (3:10).68 At the experience of the manifest presence of Yahweh in the thunder and storm, Adam responded with an incoherent fear that caused him to flee from Yahwehs presence. Adam and Eve's disobedience spiritually altered their (and subsequently all of mankinds) ability to be in the presence of Yahweh. What had previously been a relational blessing had now become a threat to their physical well being. the presence of God is so threatening to less than entirely holy people that his presence in this world, even among his own people, must be limited as to not overwhelm humans. This phenomenon is a reflection of the contrast between God's holiness and human sin. He cannot abide sin in his presence, so the closer he is to a sinner, the more difficult it is for the sinner to survive. 69 In other words, Adam's experience of Yahweh was now associated with fear
67 Jeffrey Niehaus, In the Wind of the Storm : Another Look At Genesis Iii 8, Vetus testamentum 44, no. 2 (1994): 265. (Emphasis mine) 68 Walton finds issue with this translation because (1) umu is most often connected with a storm demon or personification of a storm, rather than just storm and (2) Adam claimed that he was only hiding from the presence of Yahweh because he was naked. John H. Walton, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, (Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary), vol. 1 (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 2009), 35. While Walton's first objection has some merit and needs to be explored further, his second objection in relation to Adam's response is faulty. Adam's claim of fear because of his nakedness should be considered a lie (or at best a half-truth) in the light of the post-fall consequences of his sin. He was not physically naked (3:7). In addition to this, Adam's next response (v. 12) shifted the blame to Eve in order to avoid the direct impact of guilt.

Douglas K. Stuart, Exodus (the New American Commentary), vol. 2 (Nashville, TN: Holman Reference, 2006), 469. While Stuart articulates the understanding of the holiness of Yahweh and its interaction with human sin extremely well, I do not agree with his conclusions the fear of Yahweh's wrath is the beneficial guiding mechanism for human behavior. 28

69

brought on by an internal spiritual reaction of self-preservation due to Yahweh's consuming holiness.70 This fearfulness serves to define the natural human reaction that was continued in Adam's progeny. In Gen. 15:1 we find the same kind of fear that Adam experienced immediately negated by Yahwehs own words, Fear not ( .)Rather than interpret this as a general command for Abram to not be afraid, the jussive construction of Qal imperfect form of seems to indicate something deeper: Yahwehs desire that Abram not react in fear and flee from the threat of his impending presence. Along with Yahwehs desire that Abram not be afraid, the jussive conveys the sense that Yahweh himself will also provide the empowerment/resources necessary to make the command that has been given possible. Abrams ability to follow Yahweh's command is not based on Abram's cognitive choice to not fear, but on Yahweh's desire and command that Abram fear not, a desire that Yahweh will see to fruition. Taking the intertextual meaning of fear and the context and structure of Yahwehs command to fear not into account shows us that Yahwehs communication to Abram should be read as: It is my [Yahwehs] desire/will/purpose that you [Abram] should not react in fear and flee from my presence. I Am Your Shield Immediately following the command to fear not, Yahweh further explains his relationship to Abram in a specific self-revelatory I am statement concerning his nature and character, I am your shield ( .) This I am statement, the first in the Abrahamic

Walton believes that if Neihaus is correct then the approach of Yahweh in the thunder and storm would infer judgment. see John H. Walton, Genesis (The NIV Application Commentary), (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2001), 223-224. But, I would contend that that this passage is revelatory of Yahweh's holiness as compared to human sinfulness. Judgment follows (3:16-19) because of who Yahweh is as revealed in his command. 29

70

narrative, is particularly interesting in that Yahweh (who has previously revealed his nature and character through acting on the promise of Gen. 12) now specifically applies the noun shield to himself. Yahwehs self-designation as a shield describes, not only his past action on Abrams behalf but also, his continued relational presence in Abrams life. Through this statement, Yahweh reveals that his self-designation as Abrams shield is congruent with his own past actions, actions taken in accordance with his nature and character. The Hebrew word indicates more than the defensive weapon used in battle. Rather, it is used in this context to speak of the relational nature of Yahweh's divine covering and protection over Abram.71 Yahweh, with this self-revelatory statement, has not only pledged himself to the care and protection of Abram but he also, has chosen to reveal to Abram a facet of his own nature and character. His presence acts as a shield to Abram, a designation that is consistent with the promise of blessing Yahweh has given in Gen. 12. Yahweh himself declares, through these two statements (fear not and I am your shield) that Abram should/will not be afraid and that Abram is protected, both things that can only be attributed to Yahweh's active and continued presence in his life. But what do these two relational statements have to do with Abram's immediate circumstances? Abram is not facing any immediate human threat to his physical well-being. In fact, previous to this revelatory encounter with the word of Yahweh, Abram has just come from a decisive victory over Chedorlaomer and the kings who were with him (14.17). According to Melchizedek Abram can attribute this victory to the God Most High, and, in an interesting use of the same root of the word Yahweh

71 Swanson, James. Dictionary of Biblical Languages With Semantic Domains: Hebrew (Old Testament). electronic ed. (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997), 4482.

30

uses to describe his relationship to Abram, ( ,)Melchizedek claims that God Most High has delivered ( )Abram's enemies into his hand. (14:20)72 Blessed be Abram by God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth; and blessed be God Most High, who has delivered ( )your enemies into your hand! (14:19b-20, emphasis mine) While it is true that these two statements have everything to do with Yahweh's relational presence during the past events of Abram's life, this should not take away from the fact that the narrator seems to be heading towards a specific event about to take place in the sub-narrative of Gen. 15, the covenant ceremony. But first, the third revelatory statement, your reward shall be very great, requires our attention. Your Reward Shall Be Very Great It should be understood that the exceedingly great reward (my translation) ( )Yahweh is speaking of has little to do with the land or material possessions.73 In the encounter mentioned earlier (Gen. 14), Abram had given up the spoils of war that he had won from the king of Sodom while claiming: I have lifted my hand to [Yahweh], God Most High, Possessor of heaven and earth, that I would not take a thread or a sandal strap or anything that is yours, lest you should say, I have made Abram rich (14:22-23).

72 Victor P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis, 1-17, (New International Commentary on the Old Testament), vol. 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1990), 412. 73 Matthews holds that the phrases fear not, I am your shield, and your reward shall be exceedingly great, serve as a poetic tricolon where shield is the poetic glue holding the three together. The second and third lines can be synonymous (as in NIV) in which shield is the cause (metonymy) for the reward, that is, the Lord will bring about his reward (see NJB, NAB). The parallel line thus gaps the subject: I am your shield// [I am] your very great reward. If interpreted as a synthetic parallelism, the third line adds to the thought of protection, Your reward [will be] very great (NIV note, NASB, NRSV, HCSB). Kenneth Mathews, Genesis 11:27-50:26, (The New American Commentary), vol. 1B (Nashville, TN: Holman Reference, 2005), 162.

31

Abram's statement, coupled with Melchizedek's blessing (14:19a-20), makes it clear that Yahweh has already established himself as a source of Abram's material wealth. But what is this exceedingly great reward being promised to Abram? I would agree with Hamilton that the statement Your reward shall be exceedingly great is a self-declaration by Yahweh concerning his nature and character. This statement was given to reiterate the promise of Gen. 12:2a, that Yahweh himself will be a blessing to Abram. The divine imperative [do not fear] is followed by a word of divine self-disclosure [I am your shield]. Two clauses in apposition [I am your shield and your reward shall be exceedingly great] state the same fact twice. The first states a fact from the speakers point of view: I am a benefactor for you. The second states the same point, but from the addressee's point of view: your reward shall be exceedingly great.74 So, Yahweh, who is provides the means necessary for Abram to not fear, reveals that he himself is a shield of protection as well as the exceedingly great reward. All of these things speak intensely of Yahwehs continued relational presence with Abram. Abram himself will experience each aspect of Yahwehs declared relational presence during the upcoming covenant ceremony. This experience will forever alter Abram's understanding of Yahweh and lay the foundation for future generations understanding of how Yahweh has chosen to bless his people with his divine presence. Yahweh Clarifies His Intention Concerning Abrams Progeny Following Yahweh's self-revelatory statements of 15:1, the narrative records Abram asking two important questions concerning his progeny: But Abram said, O [Yahweh] God, what will you give me, for I continue childless, and the heir of my house is Eliezer of Damascus? And Abram said, Behold, you have given me no offspring, and a member of my household will
74 Victor P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis, 1-17, (New International Commentary on the Old Testament), vol. 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1990), 418.

32

be my heir (15:2-3). Abram, in his first direct address to Yahweh, respectfully questions Yahweh concerning, not Yahwehs self-revelatory statements but, how these declarations will relate to his progeny. Abram understood that the declaration of Yahwehs protective presence had to be seen through the lens of the original promise that Yahweh had given.75 In 12:2a Yahweh had promised to make a great nation of Abram, implying that Abrams line would continue directly through his own seed. Rather than doubting Yahweh's self-revelatory statements, Abram appears to be trying to rectify what he already knows to be true concerning Yahwehs nature and character, the promise he has been given, and his current childlessness. In response to Abram's questions, Yahweh further unpacks the promise of Gen. 12 by explaining that his relational presence would continue to be with Abrams progeny. In a vivid illustration of his creative power, he directs Abram to Look toward heaven, and number the stars, if you are able to number them (15:5a). Then Yahweh confirms that the heir to the promise of Gen. 12 would come from Abram's own seed ( )with the words, So shall your offspring be (15:5b). One should not mistake the emphasis of Gen. 15:4-6 by thinking that the vivid illustration concerning the unfathomable number of offspring was what prompted Abram's confirmation/

75 In the ANE, there were two essential values: progeny and land. It is only logical that Abram would ask Yahweh questions concerning these two things, especially in light of the promise of of Gen. 12. The relationship between Israel and Yahweh was not a merely conceptualized, spiritual entity. It was very deeply rooted in the concrete circumstances of Israel's life - social, economic and political. The primary symbol of this 'concreteness' was the Land, and the family - the household, or 'father's house' - formed the basic unit of land tenure, as it did of the social, kinship structure. In many ways - economic, judicial, military, cultic, didactic - this social unit of 'householdplus-land' was the basis of Israel's relationship with God. Since therefore, the family was of pivotal importance in the mediation and enjoyment of the nation's covenant relationship with Yahweh, the family's protection, externally and internally, was important. Christopher J. H. Wright, Ten Commandments, in The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: Q-Z, ed. Geoffrey W. Bromiley, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1995), 788.

33

belief76 in v. 6. To do so seems to cheapen the length Yahweh has gone to reveal himself in order that Abrams belief not be centered on the idea of material gain or continued progeny. Rather, I agree with Ross' conclusion that Abram's belief was not due to his observance of the number of the stars in the sky. The verb confirm/believe ( )is used with a Waw disjunctive and cannot be interpreted as in sequence with the verses that came before it.77 The sentence begins with a Waw on a perfect and could not be a Waw consecutive or the tense would be put in the future.78 Instead, the Waw disjunctive marks a parenthetical clause that the author uses to state that Abram believed in Yahweh and Yahweh reckoned righteousness to him.79 Walton holds a similar view as he explains the belief stated in v. 6 has nothing to do with a comprehensive belief system. Rather, this belief should be associated with Abrams hearing the spoken word and believing in the source of that word. Abram's belief has nothing to do with salvation and nothing to do with a faith system. He simply believed that, though he had no children and no hope of having any, God could make his offspring as numerous as the stars of the sky.80 I would further the argument by emphasizing that Abram's belief was due to the recognition of Yahweh's nature and character. Yahweh consistently revealed his nature and character through his actions according to the foundational promise and his self-revelatory
The basic sense of the form is to affirm, recognize as valid. In other words, the result is not so much a matter of objective faith as of absolute fact. Our Amen derives from the same Heb. root. E. A. Speiser, Genesis, 2nd Edition, (The Anchor Yale Bible Commentaries), (Yale University Press, 1963), 112. Pub., 2008), 111.
78 79 80 77 Allen 76

P. Ross, Genesis, Exodus (Cornerstone Biblical Commentary) (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House

Ibid.. Ibid. John H. Walton, Genesis, (The NIV Application Commentary), (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2001),

421.

34

statements. Now, with creation as a witness to his word as well as a vivd illustration of his creative power, Yahweh's nature and character are confirmed by Abram. This confirmation garnered Abram a righteous standing before Yahweh, an essential spiritual prerequisite for being in close proximity to the manifest divine presence. It is important to note that Abram did not take part in any work that would have earned him the righteousness reckoned to him by Yahweh. Rather, Yahweh, in an act of grace, reckoned righteousness to Abram because of his belief. Again, it is important to understand that Abram's belief was not centered on anything other than on Yahweh himself. Yahweh had laid the foundations for his self-revelation in the promise of Gen 12, consistently acted on this promise in Abram's life, led Abram safely to the promised land, and continued to reveal himself through direct statements concerning his nature and character. Abram's belief was a confirmation of all these things but most importantly it was a confirmation of the revelation of Yahweh's nature and character and thus, a confirmation of who Yahweh is. Abram's belief was in Yahweh ( )and Yahweh reckoned this belief as righteousness. Yahweh Declares His Impending Presence Yahweh- having reckoned Abram righteous, further reveals his nature and character through a direct revelation of his personal name. I am [Yahweh] who brought you out from Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land to possess (15:7). This is the second self-revelatory statement spoken by Yahweh and the first recorded instance where Yahweh declares his personal name to Abram. Traditionally the Hebrew Tetragrammaton ( )in this passage has been understood to be a declarative statement of

35

Yahweh's eternal existence (I am) or his creative purposes the (One Who Causes to Be),81 all in the context of his past faithfulness to Abram according to the promise of Gen. 12. While these interpretations hold to the understanding that God is revealing something specific about his nature and character in the context of the promise, they miss the essential quality of Yahwehs relational presence that pervades the biblical narrative. As has been previously discussed, Yahweh's command to fear not coupled with the selfrevelatory relational statements I am your shield and your reward shall be exceedingly great, all serve to create the context for an understanding of Yahweh's presence with Abram. Yahweh has laid the foundation of his self-revelation through his action according to the promise. Now, after guiding Abram safety to the land he will posses (as promised in 12:1b), Yahweh declares his impending presence through the use of his personal name, Yahweh, I am/will be present. The Hebrew Tetragrammaton [ ]has an essential quality of relationship not often discussed in scholarship. Jacob Milgrom, has suggested that the Hebrew Tetragrammaton [] finds its meaning in the promised continued presence of Yahweh among his people and should be interpreted as I am/will be present.82 Isbell also relates the importance of the name of Yahweh as he explains the purpose of the Tetragrammaton in its verbal form. Whenever appears in a context of divine action or promise, its theological significance as a symbol of divine presence far exceeds its simple syntactic function as a first person singular verbal form.... was from its first use in Israelite traditions involved in an emotional context; always its function was to express the presence of God in a promissory and assuring fashion. Always this assurance was expressed to someone
81

151-156.
82

cf. David Noel Freedman, Name of the God of Moses, Journal of Biblical Literature 79, no. 2 (1960):

J. Milgrom, The Desecration of YHWHs Name: Its Parameters and Significance, Birkat Shalom: Studies in the Bible, Ancient Near Eastern Literature, and Postbiblical Judaism Presented to Shalom M. Paul on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday, 80-81. c.f. Kenneth Way, Hello My Name is Yahweh, Good Book Blog (3/8/2011). 36

who really needed it. was a personal word, an I from God which one could remember and upon which one could count in the crunch. This much is certain.83 Understanding in its verbal form (3rd person singular Qal imperfect form of the verb )helps better explain the main thrust of Yahweh's statement. Not only has Yahweh been with Abram and acting on his behalf previous to and in accordance with the promise of Gen. 12, he is also present with Abram at the very moment he is speaking, and will be with Abram (and his descendants) in the future. Here, Yahweh uses the land he has brought Abram to, not as an ultimate reward for Abram's faithfulness but as a visible and tangible reference to his presence in Abram's life. As the narrative moves forward, Abram continues to press Yahweh for an answer concerning his own possession of the land. O [Yahweh] God, how am I to know that I shall possess it? (15:8) Abram does not appear to be questioning Yahweh's ability to procure the land itself. Yahweh has already proven his ability to overcome the current inhabitants (Gen. 14). Abram is, in fact, desiring a tangible sign that guarantees his and his promised seed's possession. In the ancient Near East (ANE) a sign was not a request for the god to prove himself capable of delivering on the promise given. Rather, it would serve as a tangible confirmation or seal that the deal would go through.84 Although the word for sign ( )in Hebrew is not specifically used in this passage, all the elements for the request of a sign appear.85
Charles D. Isbell The Divine Name as a Symbol of Presence in Israelite Tradition, Hebrew Annual Review 2 (1978). 101, 115. cf. Benjamin R. Foster, Transmission of Knoweldge, in A Companion to the Ancient Near East (Blackwell Companions to the Ancient World), ed. Daniel C. Snell, (Wiley-Blackwell, 2005-02-07) 254-252.
84 85 83

Gen. 4:15.

sign is only used once previous to this passage in relation to the mark Cain had received on his head

37

 The request concerns Yahweh's will and Abram's future possession of the land86 Abram seeks to validate the divine origin of an accompanying statement or revelation that Yahweh has already given him87 The request is linked to a confirmation of a previous promise, which becomes intimately linked with covenant 88 Yahweh answers with a supernatural phenomenon (his manifest presence) in order to strengthen Abram's confidence in the promise given89 Yahweh's manifest presence in the covenant ceremony becomes the basis for Abram's faith and is used to convince others that Yahweh was the true all powerful God 90 Yahwehs response to Abram's request for a sign was the manifestation of his divine presence as he performed a covenant ceremony that, not only excluded any human participation but also, furthered the revelation of his nature and character. But why does Yahweh respond to this question with a covenant ceremony? Previous questions (2-3) have been answered with a vivid illustration as a witness to Yahweh's creative power (4-5). This has seemed sufficient for Abram's belief in Yahweh to culminate into a confirmation that garners him being reckoned righteous. So, what is Yahweh trying to convey by manifesting his presence to Abram in this way? And what does the manifest presence of Yahweh have to do with the promise of Gen. 12?

86 G.A. Turner, Sign, in The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible, ed. Merrill C. Tenney and Moises Silva, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009), 508. 87 G.H. Twelftree, Signs and Wonders, in New Dictionary of Biblical Theology: Exploring the Unity & Diversity of Scripture, ed. Brian S. Rosner and others, (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2000), 776. 88 G.A. Turner, Sign, in The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible, ed. Merrill C. Tenney and Moises Silva, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009), 508. ZEB links them to covenant in Gen. 1:14: And God said, Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night. And let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and years, 89 G.A. Turner, Sign, in The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible, ed. Merrill C. Tenney and Moises Silva, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009), 508. 90 G.A. Turner, Sign, in The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible, ed. Merrill C. Tenney and Moises Silva, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009), 509 These signs were regarded by the writers of the Bible as interventions by the Creator into the sphere of creation for the purposes of revelation and redemption. As such, they were an encouragement to faith and many times they provided a basis for faith. G.H. Twelftree, Signs and Wonders, in New Dictionary of Biblical Theology: Exploring the Unity & Diversity of Scripture, ed. Brian S. Rosner and others, (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2000), 776. cf. Deut. 4:35, and later 1 Chr. 16:12; Neh. 9:10; Ps. 78:43-44; 105:26-45; Jer. 32:20-21.

38

I would posit that the Abrahamic Covenant (15:7-21) is a condescension made by Yahweh to present a tangible sign of his current and continued presence to Abram. Yahweh chose to answer Abram's request for a sign with the manifestation of his presence, further revealing himself with an action that corresponded with his self-revelatory declarations. In effect, the covenant ceremony itself becomes secondary to the central point of Gen. 15, Yahweh's divine presence is and will continue to be with Abram. It is important to understand that this ceremony is, at its very core, rooted in the promise that Yahweh will bless Abram (12:2b). The presence of Yahweh among his people, a people that began with Abram, would be considered the greatest blessing available. Quite often scholarship has gotten lost in trying to understand the soteric value of the Abrahamic covenant and ends up missing the main point: All-Mighty Yahweh -who has made irrevocable promises based on his character and nature - promises that he has already actively kept by means of his own divine power - continues to reveal himself as he manifests his presence in a covenant ceremony. Interestingly, Yahweh is the only active participant in the covenant ceremony of Gen. 15:7-21. In fact, Abram is removed from the picture, only able to witness Yahwehs action on his beahlf and not participate. As the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell on Abram. And behold, dreadful and great darkness fell upon him (15:7). 91 Also Interesting is the Hebrew verb used in v. 12 often translated sleep ( ,)actually holds the idea of an insensitivity to danger in a

Von Rad calls this a miraculous deep sleep... in which the natural activities of spirit and mind are extinguished (see Gen. 2.21), which however, sometimes awakens a man to receive a revelation (Job 4.13; 33.15). Gerhard Von Rad, Genesis - a Commentary (Old Testament Library), Revised ed. (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1973), 187. He calls the meaning of the ceremony simply the gift of quite a real guarantee. The ceremony proceeded completely without words and with the complete passivity of the human partner! Ibid., 188. 39

91

divinely empowered trance. 92 This would follow Yahwehs purpose of having Abraham personally witness the cutting of the covenant yet not be an active participant in the ceremony itself. Yahweh desired to let Abram experience the dread/fear associated with his divine presence yet not let it hinder Abram's witnessing of this relational covenant event.93 As discussed previously, in Yahwehs command to fear not and relational self-description as Abram's shield, Abram received the external empowerment from Yahweh needed to not experience the typical consuming effects that the manifest presence of Yahweh would have on the fallen human physical body. These two things combined with Abram's being reckoned righteous by Yahweh, a spiritual prerequisite to being in the manifest presence of Yahweh, prepared Abram, physically and spiritually, to witness Yahweh making a covenant concerning Abram and his descendants. It is also important to note that Yahweh himself, with Abram as a witness, walks through the pieces of animal (as a smoking pot and a flaming torch) and swears a covenant oath over Abram taking sole responsibility for Abram's future (13-17). The covenant Yahweh performs concerning Abram can be described as a modified suzerain-vassal land grant where the obligation to keep the covenant lies on the master rather than the servant.94 In this covenant it is God as the suzerain who commits himself and swears, as it were, to keep the promise. It is he

William White, in Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament. Electronic Ed., ed. R. Laird Harris, Jr. Archer, Gleason L., and Bruce K. Waltke, (Chicago: Moody Press, 1999), 834.
93

92

cf. Gen. 2:26 Where a similar deep sleep falls over Adam in the rib ceremony

94 Weinfeld states: While the treaty constitutes an obligation of the vassal to his master, the suzerain, the grant constitutes an obligation of the master to his servant. In the grant the curse is directed towards the one who will violate the rights of the king's vassal, while in the treaty the curse is directed towards the vassal who will violate the rights of his king. In other words, the grant serves mainly to protect the rights of the servant, while the treaty comes to protect the rights of the master. What is more, while the grant is a reward for loyalty and good deeds already performed, the treaty is an inducement for future loyalty. M. Weinfeld, The Covenant of Grant in the Old Testament and in the Ancient Near East, Journal of the American Oriental Society 90, no. 2 (Apr.-Jun., 1970): 185.

40

accompanied by a smoking oven and a blazing torch who passes between the parts as though he were invoking the curse upon himself.95 In his argument that Gen. 15 can be compared to the Alalakh texts (AT 456) regarding the significance of ritually slaughtering animals, Hess concludes that the focus of the ritual is not a self-imprecation oath performed by God. Rather, the common element in each animal (since they are not all spilt into two) is that each animal's life is taken away. The implication of this is that God's own divine life forms the surety for the promise.96 He then follows Wenham in understanding the significance of the animals as symbolic. [Yahwehs] act of walking between the pieces signifies his presence with his people. However, even here the symbolic identification of the life of the animals with [Yahwehs] own life reinforces the representation. His promise of the land is also a promise that his people will never perish entirely. [Yahweh] is with Israel. He guarantees by his life that he will bring them back to their land, no matter how unlikely or uncertain that may seem (vv. 13-16).97 In Gen. 12, Yahweh has promised to bless Abram with the greatest blessing possible, his continued presence. He has consistently revealed himself through his actions on behalf of Abram and, now, he has manifested his divine presence to take part in a covenant ceremony in which his own existence serves as the guarantee of his continued presence. Just as the righteousness that was reckoned to Abram found its source in Yahweh, in the same manner Yahweh's continued

95 96

Ibid., 196.

R. Hess, He Swore an Oath: Biblical Themes From Genesis 12-50, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1994), 63. emphasis mine Ibid., 63-64, emphasis mine. In any event the details present a daring anthropomorphism whereby God involves himself in an obligation whose nature is dramatized by an acted oath of self-commitment, (cf. Heb. 6:13). In any case, no undertaking is exacted from Abram; God alone is bound. William J. Dumbrell, Covenant and Creation: Old Testament Covenantal Theology (Flemington Markets, NSW: Paternoster Press, 1984), 49. 41
97

presence among his people is predicated on his grace. 98 Everything about the covenant ceremony of Gen. 15 leads to a deeper understanding that his nature and character are the basis of his relationship with Abram and his offspring. Here, at the very foundation of the covenant that would later define the people of Yahweh, we do not find any conditions or stipulations that would cause a break in relationship. Rather, what we do find is a gracious covenant that is the natural outworking of the foundational promise which is based solely Yahweh's desire to reveal himself to his creation, so that they may know him. Genesis 17 The next section of the Abrahamic narrative that needs to be discussed, (although somewhat briefly) is Gen. 17. In this section I will show that the sign of circumcision attached to the covenant is, in and of itself, revelatory of Yahwehs nature and character. It is important to notice that the narrative of Gen. 17 is split up into two distinct sections: vv. 1-8 and vv. 9-16. The first section begins abruptly with the third self-revelatory I am statement Yahweh relates to Abram regarding his nature and character. I am God Almighty, walk yourself into my presence and become blameless so that I may give my covenant between me and you, and [I] will multiply you greatly. (17:1 my translation) Again, we should take notice that Yahweh is established as the subject of this sub-narrative at its very beginning. Yahweh identifies himself as El Shaddai ( ) a self-revelatory statement connected with covenant only when human

Yahweh also further unpacks the promise of his continued presence among Abram's descendants as he pledges to deliver (13), provide for (14), and return them to the land that has been given to Abram. Not only will he do this for Abram's descendants, but he will also provide the land for Abram to be buried, an obvious indication that Abram will enter and be buried in the land Yahweh has promised him. 42

98

participation is required. 99 As stated before, Yahweh has revealed himself through his action according to the promise of Gen. 12. The self-designation of El Shaddai accentuates that Yahweh, who is/will be present, is the Almighty God, capable of fulfilling his promise to Abram. Yahweh will continue to reveal his nature and character as he continues to act according to his presence with Abram. Yahweh's statement that he is God Almighty lays the foundation for, not only the first section (vv. 1-8), but for the entire chapter. Following this self-declaration, Yahweh issues two imperatives to Abram: walk yourself into my presence and become blameless. These imperatives can be taken as sequential and mean walk yourself into my presence so that you will become blameless. The outcome is also twofold, that I may confirm/give my covenant and [so that I] may multiply you greatly.100 The commands require a spiritual preparation for receiving the covenant sign.101 Abram, who has been reckoned righteous by Yahweh, due to his belief in Yahweh, will now take part in a specific in accordance with his faith in Yahweh. 102 Interestingly, Abram again experiences some form of Yahweh's presence (as indicated by the preposition 301.This time, because Abram will be given a specific act to accomplish, he is

99 John H. Walton, Genesis, (The NIV Application Commentary), (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2001), 460. In sum then, therefore, the epithet Yahweh was connected to the longer-term promises of God to the patriarchs, specifically the land, which even Abraham was told would be a long time coming. The patriarchs could truly be considered then not to have known God by his name Yahweh [Ex. 6:2-3], for the promises with which Yahweh had been most closely associated had not yet come to pass. In Exodus, however, it was now Yahweh who was sending Moses to take the Israelites to the land that had been promised to them in the covenant. In other words, it is not that the patriarchs were ignorant of the name Yahweh, but the epithet Shaddai was appropriate for the aspects of the covenant that they had experienced. Ibid., 461.

Kenneth Mathews, Genesis 11:27-50:26, (The New American Commentary), vol. 1B (Nashville, TN: Holman Reference, 2005), 201.
101 102

100

Ibid..

The requirements may be a generic obedience, but in the context of the chapter, the only action specifically called for is circumcision, which the passage notes he expediently did. Ibid.
103

See discussion in of the First Commandment (below) 43

not removed from the situation as in the original covenant ceremony of Gen. 15. Still, this encounter with Yahweh leaves him overwhelmed enough that he fell on his face (3).104 After changing Abram's name to Abraham, a further reiteration of the promise (12:2b),105 Yahweh relates to Abram the context of the required act of circumcision, keeping the focus on his own action in fulfilling the promise of Gen. 12. It is important to note that vv. 6-8 show that this is not a new covenant being made with Abraham, the covenant itself is already in place and has been since Gen. 15. Rather, Yahweh, in vv. 6-8, is in fact doing what he said was going to do in v. 2, establishing Abraham's part to play in Yahweh's covenant.106 Before wrongly designating Abrahams required act of circumcision as entirely different from that of Gen. 15, we must revisit what has taken place in the Abrahamic narrative. The covenant of Gen. 15 was a condescension to Abraham from Yahweh which finds its sole basis for existence in the foundation for Yahweh's self-revelation, the promise of Gen. 12. Yahweh manifested his divine presence and was the sole participant in the covenant ceremony. The covenant itself holds no conditionality based on Abraham's actions, it is based solely on character and nature of Yahweh and extended to Abraham as an act of grace. The blessing promised to Abram in Gen. 12 and further explained through the covenant ceremony was Yahweh's own divine presence, active in the life of Abram and his descendants.
Matthews holds that this is demeanor of respect toward a superior (e.g. 37:10; 42:6; 44:14; 48:12; 2 Sam. 9:6; 1 Kings 18:7)...and a profound pleading before the Lord in a moment of crisis (Num. 16:4, 22; Josh. 7:6; cp. Moses to theophany in Ex 34:8)...Such a reaction in the presence of the Lord is recorded only of Abram and his servant (24:52) among the patriarchs (cp. the greeting, 18:2; 19:1). Ibid.
105 Changing Abram's name to Abraham was a divine guarantee concerning Abram's identity and future. Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 16-50, (Word Biblical Commentary), vol. 2 (Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1994), 21. 106 What God is doing and will do is the subject of this speech. Here the promissory aspect of the covenant is all-embracing, particularly the promise of descendants to which this chapter returns time and time again. V. 2 stated that it was God's intention to make his covenant with Abraham. V. 4 clarifies this: since there is already a covenant with Abraham, God will make him father of a multitude of nations. Previously the promise had simply been that Abram should be a great nation (12:2), beyond counting (16:10). This promise goes much further. Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 16-50, (Word Biblical Commentary), vol. 2 (Dallas, TX: Thomas Nelson, 1994), 21. 104

44

In the second section of this chapter (vv. 9-16) Yahweh, progenerator of the promise and sole source and bound participant of the covenant, further reveals to the patriarch of his chosen people, his divine will concerning the devotional response required to take part in the blessings associated with this covenant. The covenant must be kept, Abraham must circumcise every male in his family, and his offspring must continue the devotional tradition indefinitely.107 Previously, Abraham requested a sign concerning the land and Yahweh answered him with his manifest presence in a covenant ceremony. Now, the internal spiritual devotion required to take part in the previously established promised blessing of Yahwehs presence will be manifest in the flesh of Yahweh's chosen people, the covenant sign of circumcision itself serving a revelatory purpose.108 With the understanding that physical act of circumcision was itself a devotional response to Yahweh's gracious presence among his people, its revelatory purpose becomes clear: Yahweh establishes circumcision as a sign to reveal his nature and character not only to Abraham and his descendants, but also to the all the families of the earth (fulfilling 12:3b). He does this in two ways: (1) Circumcision serves as an internal witness among the people of Yahweh. A reminder that Yahweh has chosen Abraham and his seed, setting them apart from all the nations of the earth as his people by his continued presence. We must remember that this state of being chosen does not find its source in the covenant of Gen. 15 (or 17) but in the promise of Gen. 12. A

107 The obligations associated with the covenant to (1) live uprightly and (2) practice circumcision do not constitute a covenant relationship but presuppose one already in place. Kenneth Mathews, Genesis 11:27-50:26, (The New American Commentary), vol. 1B (Nashville, TN: Holman Reference, 2005), 195.

That the covenant is fundamentally a spiritual relationship, founded and maintained by God's elective grace, is apparent by the continuation of the covenant despite the repeated failures of the patriarch and his successors to observe a blameless life, for example, the wife-sister ploy (chaps. 20, 26) and the circumcision ploy (chap. 34). Kenneth Mathews, Genesis 11:27-50:26, (The New American Commentary), vol. 1B (Nashville, TN: Holman Reference, 2005), 196. 45

108

promise that is predicated on God's nature and character and defined by his active presence as he guides, protects and makes his people a great nation. The blessing of the promise of Gen. 12 will continue to unfold as the narrative of salvation history progresses. The descendants of Abram will serve an important part of God's salvific plan, a plan that includes the blessing of all nations. (2) Circumcision also serves as an external witness to the surrounding nations, designating Abraham and his descendants as the people of Yahweh. While the physical act of circumcision was not uncommon in the ANE, this particular form of circumcision, connected to a divine promise and explained through a divine covenant, was unique.109 For the descendants of Abraham, the removal of the foreskin from an organ through which the literal seed of the promise would pass was to be a physical manifestation of their spiritual devotion to Yahweh. As they took bore the sign of circumcision in their bodies, Abraham and his descendants signified their willingness to serve as witnesses to the surrounding nations of Yahwehs presence in their midst. Material wealth, success in battle, a flourishing land, multiple healthy generations, etc., were all theocentric indicators of the blessing of Yahwehs presence among them. Rather than approach circumcision in an ethnocentric manner, a manner that established and confirmed their own ethnic identity, the people were view circumcision for its theocentric purpose. Their physical bodies were to become a vivd witness of Yahwehs presence among them as he established and protected current and future generations. This vivid witness not only served to

109 Jack M. Sasson, M, Circumcision in the ancient Near East. Journal of Biblical Literature 85, no. 4: (1966): 474.; Walton, John H. ed. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers (Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary), vol. 1,. Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan, 2009; Nick Wyatt,Circumcision and Circumstance: Male Genital Mutilation in Ancient Israel and Ugarit. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 33, no. 4: (2009): 422.; Richard C. Steiner, Incomplete Circumcision in Egypt and Edom: Jeremiah (9:24-25) in the Light of Josephus and.. Journal of Biblical Literature 118, no. 3: 497. (1999): 503. 7; Philip J. King,. Circumcision: Who Did It, Who Didn't and Why. Biblical Archaeology Review 32, no. 4: (2006): 53.

46

remind the natural descendants of Abraham of the blessing they had and would continue to receive, it also reminded them that they were to serve as witnesses to the fact that the blessing of Yahwehs presence would one day be extended to all the families of the earth (Gen. 12:3). So in effect, the covenantal sign of circumcision was always about more than just the descendants of Abraham as an ethnic group, it served as a reminder of the very nature and character of Yahweh, that he desired all nations to partake in his promised presence. Genesis 18:17-20 explains: The Lord said, Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do, seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him?For I have chosen him, that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the Lord by doing righteousness and justice, so that the Lord may bring to Abraham what he has promised him. The Law The Revelatory Function of the Law Having covered the foundational promise and graceful giving of the covenant, we must now broach the all important topic of the function of the Law in Yahweh's continued program of self-revelation. It is widely recognized that the first instance of the Mosaic Law in the Pentateuch is intimately connected with Yahweh's revelatory presence at the forming of the Mosaic Covenant at Mt. Sinai. This covenant ceremony should be understood as a renewal ceremony in which Yahweh invites the people of Israel, who are the rightful heirs of Abraham, to enjoy the same promised blessing extended to their forefathers, the relational presence of Yahweh. 110 Contrary to the understanding that the Mosaic Covenant is uniquely separate from the Abrahamic

110 Daniel I. Block, How I Love Your Torah, O Lord!: Studies in the Book of Deuteronomy (Eugene, Or: Cascade Books, 2011), 26-28 note 23.

47

Covenant, I would hold that it is a continuation of what Yahweh has previously established. Hamilton sums it up quite nicely by reminding us that, The purpose of the Lord's offering a covenant is not to 'make' Israel God's people. They are already God's people. Earlier in Exodus the Lord has already called Israel 'my people' (e.g., 3:7, 'I have seen the misery of my people in Egypt'; 3:10, 'my first born son' (4:22), 'my son' (4:23). Also, Moses in conversation with the Lord has called Israel 'your people' (5:23). 111

Now Israel, like Abraham, has an opportunity to take part in Yahwehs previously established gracious covenant founded on the promise of blessing synonymous with his divine presence. In Ex. 19-20, The blessing of Yahwehs continued presence is once again accentuated by Yahwehs self-manifestation. Immediately prior to the covenant ceremony, Yahweh begins the process of covenant renewal with a statement (delivered by Moses) concerning his past action on behalf of the people of Israel. You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles wings and brought you to myself. Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine; and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. (19:4-6) The last phrase 'I brought you to me/myself' of v.4 may simply be a way of expressing covenant terminology. But it may be more than covenantal vocabulary. The phrase suggests that God's primary purpose of bonding with Israel is for that rapturous enjoyment of each other's presence. Before Israel is chosen for service, Israel is chosen for fellowship.112

111

301.

Victor P. Hamilton, Exodus: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2011),

cf. John H. Walton, Covenant: Gods Purpose, Gods Plan (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994), 63-81.
112

301.

Victor P. Hamilton, Exodus: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2011),

cf. John H. Walton, Covenant: Gods Purpose, Gods Plan (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994), 302 48

Yahweh gracefully invites Israel to be part of something he has already established. Added to the fact that he is and has already been present among them, delivering, guiding and protecting them, Yahweh desires that Israel formalize their commitment to him, recognize their status as his treasured possession, and take their place as a kingdom of priests and a holy nation in his self-revelatory program. THE DECALOGUE After the people agree to do what has been asked of them, Yahweh manifests his divine presence and personally speaks to his people, relating what has become to be known as the Decalogue. Block describes the connection between covenant and the Decalogue with the following, So tightly linked to the covenant is the Decalogue that its contents may be referred to as the words of the covenant (Ex 34:28) and even more directly his covenant (Deut 4:13), and the written document itself as the tablets of the covenant (Deut 9:9, 11, 15). As the covenant document, the Decalogue provided Israel with concrete proof of the divine Suzerain's immutable commitment to them and a constant reminder of their commitment to him.113 One cannot deny that something unique is taking place as Yahweh himself relates his divine will in the form of the Decalogue. I would posit that, along with the declaration of his presence, Yahweh issues the the ten words/commands in order to establish the theocentric framework for the people of Israel to understand and take part in promised blessing of Gen. 12, his continued presence. Within the Decalogue, Yahweh continues to reveal his nature and character to his people, establishing the theocentric focus for the practical outworking of their spiritual devotion. As the people of Israel continue to discover aspects of Yahwehs nature and

113 Daniel I. Block, How I Love Your Torah, O Lord!: Studies in the Book of Deuteronomy (Eugene, Or: Cascade Books, 2011), 26-27.

49

character their physical acts should reflect their internal spiritual devotion to Yahweh. Their participation should never be limited to the physical act alone, to do so would undermine the theocentric framework within which Yahwehs will was revealed as well as the theocentric purpose for which it was given. In short, Yahweh should always be the focus of any act born from his revealed will, an ethnocentric focus would never suffice. I Am Yahweh In the opening line of the Decalogue, Yahweh once again reveals his presence through the use of his personal name, I am Yahweh your God, (20:2a).114 Surrounded by a cacophony of trumpets and some of the most expressive acts of power in the natural world Yahweh, through his own words, reveals that he has been and will be present among his chosen people. Adding to the revelation of his presence, Yahweh further identifies himself as the God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery (20:2b). Both the natural phenomenon surrounding his manifest presence and the declaration of Israel's salvation from the hands of the Egyptians no doubt brought to mind the supernatural way Yahweh manifested himself in the fire and cloud, guiding them and enveloping them in his protective presence (Ex. 13:17-22; 14:19-24). Nor could there be any mistake that Yahweh, their God, was the same Yahweh that

114 Therefore, to begin, the Lawgiver places the law in the environment of grace, for it is the gracious act of redemption and deliverance from Egypt that reveals the Lawgiver's name, Yahweh. The I is both emphatic and the subject; Yahweh is the predicate.... Indeed, the introduction of Yahweh's name at this point brackets both ends of the exodus event. In Exodus 3:14 and 6:2, God tied the promise of his deliverance of Israel from Egypt with his name, Yahweh. Once that promise becomes a reality, he proclaims his name again. All that Yahweh is, says, and does is embodied in this one affirmation, 'I am Yahweh' John H. Sailhammer, Walter C. Kaiser Jr, and Richard Hess, Genesis-Leviticus, Revised ed., (The Expositors Bible Commentary): (Zondervan, 2008), 479.

50

manifested himself in smoke, fire and lightening to their forefather Abraham (Gen. 15:17).115 And, just as in the case of Abraham, Yahweh invites the people of Israel to take part in the blessing of his presence associated with the covenant that is predicated on his nature and character and given by his grace.116 Following the declaration of his continued relational presence, the first four commands encapsulate the way the people of Israel are to respond to Yahweh's presence in worshipful devotion. It is important to remember that these words are spoken directly to the people of Israel by Yahweh himself in the context of his manifest presence. The first command of the Decalogue lays the groundwork for Israel to understand that Yahwehs presence among them is not to be taken lightly. You shall have no other gods in my presence (20:3, my translation). Central to this simple yet profound command is the use of the preposition which connotes the concept of presence (Ex. 20:20: 33:19, 34:6, etc.). Wells holds that this command may be the root of a monotheistic understanding that was used to counteract the belief of a divine assembly or pantheon. To have no other gods in the presence of
115 There is an unmistakable association between the events. Kenneth Mathews, Genesis 11:27-50:26, (The New American Commentary), vol. 1B (Nashville, TN: Holman Reference, 2005), 175. Each element is used elsewhere to describe the perceived presence of Yahweh. Smoke, attends divine theophanies (e.g., Isa 6:4), functioning as a veil, and may also signify the Lord's wrath (2 Sam 22:9 = Ps 18:9). Ibid., 175. Torch, appears in prophetic descriptions of the awesome and eerie presence of God (cp. Ezek 1:13; Dan 10:6), and it pictures destruction (cp. Judg. 15:5 with Zech. 12:6.). Ibid., 175. The torch signified Gods presence, frightening but at the same time reassuring, just as the covenant itself contained promises of blessings and threat of curses. The theophany accompanying the giving of the covenant of the law included flashes of lightening and flames of fire (Ex. 20:18)... The same word is used in Eze. 1:13 to describe the appearance of fierily flashes between the cherubim and in Dan. 10:6 to describe the resplendent eyes of the man who appeared to Daniel in a vision. William T. Koopmans, , in New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, ed. General Editor Willem A. VanGemeren, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1997), 809. For furnace cf. I. Cornelius, in New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, ed. General Editor Willem A. VanGemeren, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1997). 312-313. 116 This prologue provides the reason why the Lord can now impose these ten laws. He is not only the one who has redeemed his people from slavery; now, having redeemed them, he also desires to begin to form his holy character in them. The one who has released Israel from the Egyptian-imposed boundaries will now speak to Israel about Yahweh-imposed boundaries. There is a world of difference between boundaries that enslave and boundaries that energize, boundaries that destroy life and boundaries that direct life. Victor P. Hamilton, Exodus: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2011), 328.

51

Yahweh implies that he is, in a sense, an assembly unto himself. He consults with no other divine beings, and since the latter are thus removed from the divine decision-making process, it makes little sense to consider them gods.117 Yahweh, the God who is/will be present, reveals that he is markedly different from the other gods of the ANE. It is Israels responsibility to not only recognize this difference but communicate it to the surrounding nations through their devotion. No Carved Images You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them, (vv. 4-5a) The second command is an injunction against the crafting of idols- images made from wood, stone, or metal- that were shaped to represent or embody the deity. Idols served a mediatory function in regards to the presence of gods and subsequent revelation that their presence brings in ANE societies.118 Through a series of rituals, idols were made fit to be inhabited by the god's presence to become the pure epiphany of its god and to be a fully interacting and communicating partner for the king, the priests, and the faithful.119 To make an image that represented Yahweh would be an affront the very way he had chosen to reveal himself to Israel. Hamilton holds that the closest explanation of this prohibition comes from Deut. 4:11-20, where Moses explains that though the people heard the words of
Bruce Wells, Exodus, in Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, ed. John H. Walton, Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011), 230. cf. John H. Walton, Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament: Introducing the Conceptual World of the Hebrew Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2006-11-01), 155-156.
118 Bruce Wells, Exodus, in Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, ed. John H. Walton, Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011). 232. 119 A. Berlejung, Washing the Mouth: The Consecration of Divine Images in Mesopotamia, in The Image and the Book: Iconic Cults, Aniconism, and the Rise of Book Religion in Israel and the Ancient Near East, ed. K. van der Toorn (Contributions to Biblical Exegesis & Theology 21; Leuven : Peeters, 1997), 72. 117

52

Yahweh, they saw no form (4:12, 15). This discloses the truth that because God speaks from heaven without anything representing him being visible, there is no legitimacy for making any kind of image of him.... Since at the holy mountain God does not manifest himself in an image, images are therefore excluded as a means by which God reveals himself. 120 Yahwehs presence was not something that could be encapsulated for ritualistic purposes or manipulated. Rather, the presence of Yahweh among his people was directly related to the promise he had made to Abraham. Yahweh, who is already present among his people, needs no symbol or indication of his presence other than what he chooses to reveal about himself. 121 Yahweh further reveals his nature and character as he describes himself in v. 5b: for I Yahweh your God am a zealous God (my translation). Yahweh's zeal for his continued presence among his chosen people will require him to act in accordance with his self-revelation, actively maintaining the correct revelation of himself. Yahweh declares that he will be present among his people, actively dispensing his judgement (visiting the iniquity) and grace ( )according to his covenant that he has already gracefully established.122 Yahweh promises his to the thousands [or thousand generations] of those who love me and keep my commands (6).123 As

120

330-331.

Victor P. Hamilton, Exodus: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2011),

121 Even the things that accompany the theophany (fire, smoke, trumpets, etc.) were meant to be revelatory of Yahwehs power over the natural elements. 122 It is important to note that Yahweh's promised actions are not based solely on the second commandment. Rather, the statement v. 5b seems to occupy a central place in the text which describes his response to any of the iniquity or keeping of all the commandments. 123 Covenant is only actualized between God and his people in the Bible where there is hesed, for it is a committed, familial love that is deeper than social expectations or what is deserved or earned by the recipient. More than just an inclination or emotion, hesed incarnates itself in action...Indeed the fathomless hesed love of God toward his people is meant to illicit worship from them. E.A. Heath, Grace, in Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch, ed. T. Desmond Alexander and David W. Baker, The IVP Bible Dictionary Series (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2002), 372.

53

he actively dispenses his grace and judgment to and through Israel, he declares his presence among them and, as we shall see in the next command, to the surrounding nations. In the third command Yahweh declares that it is his presence among his people that establishes Israels identity. 124 You shall not take the name of [Yahweh] your God in vain, for [Yahweh] will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain (7). Block holds that the central issue in this command has to do with wearing the name of YHWH as a badge or brand of ownership.125 Here, as in Ex. 28:12 and 29 where the high priest bears the names of the sons of Israel on the breastpiece of judgement, the verb carries the normal meaning, to bear, to carry.126 In the same manner, in the front of the turban of the high priest carried a medallion with the words holy belonging to YHWH (28:36). 127 Later the same expression is applied to the people of Israel (Deut. 26:19). Like the Shema, which was to be inscribed on the houses and the gates and on phylacteries on the forehead, to bear the name of [Yahweh] means to have his name branded on one's person as a mark of divine ownership.128 This brand of divine ownership had two very important purposes: (1) it defines the identity of Israel through the lens of Yahwehs redemption from Egypt, (2) it made Israels name synonymous with Yahweh in the eyes of the surrounding nations.

124 This exposition of the 2nd commandment is deeply indebted to Daniel Block's essay Bearing the Name of the Lord with Honor found in Daniel I. Block, How I Love Your Torah, O Lord!: Studies in the Book of Deuteronomy (Eugene, Or: Cascade Books, 2011), 61-72. 125 126 127 128

Ibid., 63. Ibid., 63. Ibid., 64. Ibid. 54

This is what Israel had become at Mount Sinai. Through the covenant ratification proceedings, the beneficiaries of YHWH's great acts of deliverance -- the people who had only recently been the enslaved property of Pharaoh but had been freed to become the vassals of YHWH - were stamped with his name. But in this case the stamp not only claimed Israel as the people belonging to YHWH; it also meant that everywhere the people went they represented him and declared to the world the privilege of being his.129 Israel was to recognize the presence of Yahweh in their midst by bearing his name. Previously, Yahweh's name has served as the opening statement to the declaration of his intention to establish his graceful covenant with and continue his presence among his chosen people. In this command, Yahweh reminds his people that it is his presence that forms their core identity. They are no longer slaves of an Egyptian Pharaoh but they have been delivered by Yahweh, who continues to be present with them. Their actions should reflect an understanding of Yahwehs past action on their behalf and a recognition of his presence. This recognition should give birth to a devotion that is as qualitatively different from the other nations Israel encounters, as Yahweh is to the gods of these other nations. How Israel bears the name of Yahweh will not only distinguish Yahweh from other gods, but it will also distinguish his nature and character through the revelation of his covenant grace. Israels presence among other nations also serves as a declaration of Yahwehs presence on earth, the very core of the gospel.130 The fourth command instills a weekly devotional recognition of Yahwehs presence as he dwells in their midst. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy (20:8). Yahweh has declared the origin of the weekly Sabbath is to be found in his original creation of the world. For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh

129 130

Ibid., 65-66.

The LXX has a few important instances of the word (Is. 60:6; Ps. 67:12; PsSol. 11) In regards to our study Ps. 40 (esp. v. 10) seems to carry the meaning of the presence of Yahweh as he delivers the author from the destruction he is facing. 55

day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy (11). But, was Yahweh's rest solely an indication that his work had been completed? Other occurrences of the Hebrew word for rest ( )in the Pentateuch (where Yahweh is the subject) indicate his presence among his people as he either acts on their behalf (Gen. 2:15; 19:16; Deut. 12:10; 26:4) or instructs the people to perform certain actions in association with his presence (Ex. 16:33-34; Lev. 16:23; Num. 17:4; 19:9). One verse in particular proves to be the most important for our understanding of and Yahwehs presence with his people, Ex. 33:14. Following Yahweh's command to leave Sinai and head towards the promised land, Moses makes a request of Yahweh, please show me now your ways, that I may know you in order to find favor in your sight (Ex. 33:13b). Yahweh then declares that he will accompany the people on the journey (something that he had previously said he would not do). My presence will go with you, and I will give you rest (Ex:33:14). Interestingly, in this clarifying passage (as well as the others listed above), the idea of rest finds its source in Yahweh as his presence continues among his people. In short, it is Yahweh's presence that makes rest available to the people of Israel. This rest is the same rest that Yahweh established on the seventh day of creation. It is also interesting to note that this command begins with the injunction to Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. The phrase keep it holy ( )is in the Hebrew Piel form, prescribing a positive/proactive action from the people of Israel. The Sabbath is not just about the cessation of work and physical rest, rather it implies a proactive action towards sanctifying the day of the Sabbath.131 I would hold that this proactive action is a description the people's worshipful recognition of the presence of Yahweh in their midst. The people were to consecrate
131

415-416.

Brevard S. Childs, Book of Exodus (Old Testament Library) (Louisville, KY: Westminster Press, 2004),

56

the Sabbath day, setting aside the normal physical activity and recognizing that Yahwehs presence was the source of their life, redemption, and identity (Deut. 5:15). It was to combine a celebration of [Yahweh] as Creator and Redeemer, being a foretaste of entering into the creation ideal, which was also the goal of redemption. The holiness of the day, and Israel's participation in it, indicated that the day was lived in the presence of [Yahweh].132 The Sabbath was also to serve as a sign that Israel had chosen to take part in the gracious covenant Yahweh had made with Abraham as well as a confirmation that they understood their identity was based solely on Yahweh's presence among them. Included later in the consecration of the day was the serious threat of death for those who broke the sacredness of the day and maintained their physical labor (31:12-17). The removal of an offender served to keep the identity of the covenant people of Israel holy as they revealed Yahweh's nature and character to the surrounding nations. As we have clearly seen, Yahweh, in his own words and in conjunction with the manifestation of his presence, has revealed his nature and character through the prologue and first four commands of the Decalogue. Together the prologue combined with the four commands serve two important functions: (1) To create the undergirding theocentric framework necessary in order to understand who Yahweh is. Yahweh has established Israel as his people through intense manifestations of his power as he has acted on their behalf. He has held true the promise of Gen. 12 creating continuity between Israels experience and the experiences of their forefathers. He has blessed his people through his presence and now offers to continue that presence with them

132 P.A. Barker, Sabbath, in Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch, ed. T. Desmond Alexander and David W. Baker, The IVP Bible Dictionary Series (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2002), 698.

57

as they take part in his gracious covenant. Now, as he speaks the words of the decalogue, Yahweh has further revealed his nature and character as he explains that he is qualitatively different from other so-called gods. He is present among his people and that presence will not tolerate other gods, nor will he be confined or manipulated, instead he must be recognized and revered for who he is and what he has gracefully done on behalf of his people. (2) To provide a theocentric paradigm within which one may devotionally act in accordance with Yahwehs will. Within the theocentric framework of the Decalogue, Yahweh revealed what Israels practical outworking of their spiritual devotion should look like as they live in his presence. Yahwehs presence among his people not only creates their identity, it should also to be the central point of their daily existence. The knowledge of Yahweh, given through his selfrevelation and confirmed through his past and continued gracious action on their behalf should give birth to a heartfelt devotion that leads one to act in accordance Yahwehs declared will. The prescription itself is a gracious and revelatory act. Yahwehs self-revelation is, founded on the promise of Gen. 12, further established in the Abrahamic Covenant (Gen. 15), and continued at Mt. Sinai in the form of the Decalogue. This revelation should be seen as the continued gracious act of a loving God who desires a relationship with his chosen people. Yahweh himself is the sole source of this relationship which is predicated on the graceful revelation of his nature and character. As the people of Israel come to know Yahweh through his self-revelation they begin to understand the deeper implications of his presence in their midst. Even here, Yahweh provides the means of correctly worshiping him that would be qualitatively different from the worship of pagan gods in the surrounding nations.

58

He instills in his people a theocentric identity that would continue, if properly maintained, to reveal Yahweh to future generations of Israelites as well as to the surrounding nations they would encounter. The Decalogue as Torah Law As we have seen, the Decalogue serves as an intimate link to the covenant but it is also important to note that the Decalogue should be understood to be the foundation of Torah (or Law). The idea of covenant, Decalogue, and Torah ( )are intimately linked in the book of Exodus. Hamilton points out that the legal section in Exodus consisting of the Decalogue (20:1-17) and a collection of Laws (20:22-23:19) is placed in between two chapters that specifically highlight the covenant. In Ex. 19, Yahweh offers the covenant to Israel which is accepted in chap. 24 (preliminarily in 19:8). Hence we have the sequence in this unit of covenant (Ex. 19) to law (most of 20-23) to covenant (24). For that reason alone, at least in Exodus, (and Deuteronomy), one cannot speak of covenant without law, nor can one speak of law without covenant. These are not two independent entities that just happen to stand side by side. Rather, each interacts with each other and gives the other its fullest, richest meaning.133 Later in the narrative, Yahweh gives Moses written copies of the Decalogue on tablets of stone. Yahweh describes this document as the tablets of stone, with the law and the commandment, which I have written for their instruction. (Ex. 24:12) Block notes that the three direct objects of the verb make the construction of the clause difficult. I agree with his conclusion that the waw conjunction should be interpreted epexegetically rendering the finished translation: the tablets of stone, that is, the Torah, that is, the command that I have written for

133

319.

Victor P. Hamilton, Exodus: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2011),

59

their instruction. The Decalogue that Yahweh is about to give was for the instruction ( )of the people (a word that is a cognate of .) The Decalogue represented the foundation of all other documents that came to make up Israels constitutional treasure: The Book of the Covenant (Ex. 20:22 - 23:19), the Holiness Code (Lev. 17-26), and the deuteronomic Torah.134 What is the Torah? When considering the topic of OT Torah, an few important questions need to be addressed concerning its composition: What can be considered Torah, especially in the eyes of NT writes like Paul? Is the entire Pentateuch taken as a whole referred to as Torah? Or does Torah consist of only certain sections of the book of Deuteronomy, specifically the section refereed to as deuteronomic Torah? Answers to these questions vary greatly from one scholar to the next. When viewing the evidence from an OT perspective, the idea of the Torah seems to point to the culmination of the entire Pentateuch found in the deuteronomic Torah.135 It is important to note that the designation of this section of the Pentateuch as Torah by no means excludes the narrative portions of the Pentateuch. In fact, each of the Law collections given are

Daniel I. Block, How I Love Your Torah, O Lord!: Studies in the Book of Deuteronomy (Eugene, Or: Cascade Books, 2011), 42. The deuteronomic Torah (found in Deut. 4:1-40; 5:1- 26:19; 28:1-69) exceeds all the other instances of law in the OT in authority because of its canonicity and culmination. Recognizing that the terms of the Mosaic covenant were laid out in stages, Block relates that Moses's speeches in Deuteronomy represent the culmination of that revelatory process; and the covenant renewal ceremony that underlines the entire book represents the occasion when the Israelites committed themselves to the entire package - text and interpretation. Ibid., 45. 60
135

134

themselves embedded in the context of narrative. 136 So, I would hold that the concept of Torah is centered on the culmination of law code found in the deuteronomic Torah but intimately linked to the entire narrative of the Pentateuch, a narrative that continues to permeate the way NT writers such as Paul view the purpose and meaning behind specific statues and ordinances. What is Torahs Purpose? Daniel Block offers one of the best explanations of the purpose of the OT Torah in his article The Grace of Torah: The Mosaic Prescription for Life (Deut. 4:1-8; 6:20-25).137 In Deut. 6:20, Moses explains to the people of Israel that future generations will want to know the purpose of Yahwehs covenant stipulations ( )and ordinances ( )and regulations ( .)These three expressions represent the will of God as it had been revealed primarily at Horeb and to a lesser degree en route to the Promised Land. They point to all the moral, ceremonial, and civil regulations God prescribed as the appropriate response to His salvation and the privilege of covenant relationship.138

136M.J. Selman, Law, in Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch, ed. T. Desmond Alexander and David W. Baker, The IVP Bible Dictionary Series (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2002), 500. What Deuteronomy has done is to give this combination the explicit designation [torah]. The use of [torah] for the Pentateuch as a whole is a further extension of the same idea... According to the Psalms, the Israelites used the [torah] to teach their children about Gods wonders and Israels repeated rebellion (Ps. 78:5), while the prophets show that rejecting Yahwehs [torah] involved denying the purpose of the exodus as well as failing to keep Gods requirements (Amos 2:4-12). References to a book of the [torah], apparently in direct dependence of Deuteronomy (Josh 8:31; 2 Kings 22 cf. Deut 30:10 ), and to [torah] as a source of blessing rather than condemnation (cf. Josh 1:8; Neh 8:10-18) also support the idea of a document combining narrative and laws. Ibid., 500. 137 Daniel I. Block, The Grace of Torah: The Mosaic Prescription for Life (Deut. 4: 18; 6: 2025). Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 162, (2005): 3-22. Since republished in Daniel I. Block, How I Love Your Torah, O Lord!: Studies in the Book of Deuteronomy (Eugene, Or: Cascade Books, 2011), 1-20. 138 Daniel I. Block, The Grace of Torah: The Mosaic Prescription for Life (Deut. 4: 18; 6: 2025). Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 162, (2005): 5.

61

Block holds that Moses answered the question of the purpose of the Torah in Deut. 4:1-8, showing that the knowledge of the will of God is the supreme privilege of the covenant people of God....Moses affirmed that knowledge of the Torah was the highest privilege imaginable.139 See, I have taught you statutes and rules as Yahweh my God commanded me, that you should do them in the land that you are entering to take possession of it. Keep them and do them, for that will be your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the peoples, who, when they hear all these statutes, will say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people. For what great nation is there that has a god so near to it as Yahweh our God is to us, whenever we call upon him? And what great nation is there, that has statutes and rules so righteous as all this law that I set before you today? (Deuteronomy 4:5-8) The giving of the Torah itself was a graceful act because the statutes and judgments found within the Torah reveal the righteousness desires of the Law giver. By His grace God has given His people statutes and judgments that are perfect in righteousness (Deut. 4:8), because (a) they reveal with perfect clarity who He is, (b) they reveal with perfect clarity what sin is, and (c) they reveal with perfect clarity how that sin may be removed and a relationship of peace and confidence with Him established and maintained.140 Block contrasts this revelation of Yahwehs nature and character with the surrounding nations by showing the three insurmountable problems an individual of these ANE cultures had: First, he did not know which god he had offended. Second, he did not know what the offense was. Third, he did not know what it would take to satisfy the god or gods.141 Yahweh, through the promise of Gen. 12 has laid the foundation of his self-revelation to his people, a self-revelation that is further explained through through the covenant and Decalogue and continues in the form of Torah. With these laws he continues to instruct his

139 140 141

Ibid., 7. Ibid., 12. (emphasis mine) Ibid., 12. (emphasis mine) 62

chosen people how to devotionally respond to his graceful presence in their midst as he continues to act on their behalf. Block defines this moment in Israels history as ... a climactic moment of divine grace.... To Moses, receiving the revelation of God's will was a supreme privilegeand the more detailed the revelation the greater the privilege. The Israelites had been liberated from the bondage of Egypt that they might become the privileged servants of the Lord, in fact, His sons (14:1).142 The divine grace of Torah is further explained by Moses as he relates the purpose of the covenant stipulations and ordinances and regulations.

And [Yahweh] commanded us to do all these statutes, to fear [Yahweh] our God, for our good always, that he might preserve us alive, as we are this day. And it will be righteousness for us, if we are careful to do all this commandment before [Yahweh] our God, as he has commanded us. (Deut. 6:24-25, Emphasis mine) Block holds that the idea of fear in this particular context is quite opposite from the fear Yahweh has commanded and empowered Abram not to have in Gen. 15. Rather, fear ( )in the context of explaining the purpose of the Torah, not only serves to describe the awed disposition towards Yahweh, but it also serves as the OT word for faith in Yahweh that is demonstrated in obedience to his word.143 Later we gain a clearer picture of what fearing Yahweh is all about. And now, Israel, what does Yahweh your God require of you, but to fear Yahweh your God, to walk in all his ways, to love him, to serve Yahweh your God with all your heart and with all your soul, and to keep the commandments and statutes of Yahweh, which I am commanding you today for your good?...Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no longer stubborn... You shall fear Yahweh your God. You shall serve him and hold fast to him, and by his name you shall swear. He is your praise. He is your God, who has done for you these great and terrifying things that your eyes have seen. (10:12-21)

142 143

Ibid., 13-14. (emphasis mine) Ibid., 15. 63

One cannot help but notice that the concept of fear is intimately connected with love and service of Yahweh born of an innermost desire/heart coming from the core of your existence/ soul. I would posit that this kind of fear should be seen as a devotional response to Yahwehs presence as he dwells among his people. As the people of Israel act on the word Yahweh has given them describing his desired method of worship (a method that coincides with his revealed nature and character and explains his presence in their midst) they are to approach this act with an attitude of awe inspired reverence. This awe comes from their knowledge of his nature and character and a recognition of his past and continued graceful presence acting on their behalf. Adams fearful reaction to Yahwehs presence is a thing of the past. Yahwehs negation of that fear and empowerment of Abraham to survive in his presence now serves as the theocentric paradigm through which the people of Israel experience relationship with their God. Conclusion So, with the understanding that the Torah itself was a graceful gift from Yahweh as he furthered the revelation of his nature and character, Torahs foundation in the promise of Gen. 12 becomes clear. The promise of Gen. 12 served as the foundation for all of Yahwehs subsequent self-revelation and establishes the theocentric context for which Abraham, his descendants, and all the nations of the earth have the opportunity to experience the blessing of the presence of Yahweh. In the OT, preforming the prescribed actions of the Torah required the people to have a theocentric focus. These actions served as an outward sign of an internal spiritual devotion. This devotion was never to be centered on the Torah itself. Rather, it was always to be focused on Yahweh, the one who gracefully gave the Torah to explicitly define his expectations for his

64

people as he dwelt in their presence. The Torah epitomized righteousness, not because of the work being done, but because of the devotion it expressed to the Righteous One. Righteousness, then, never came from the law itself but from the Torah Giver. Just as in Abrahams case, the righteousness (a characteristic of Yahweh himself) of the people of Israel came through faith in Yahweh. As one acted righteously, in accordance with the prescribed method of worship as revealed in the Torah, the faith of the individual was made evident further revealing the righteousness of Yahweh.

65

Chapter 3: Pauls Revelatory View of the Law in Galatians The purpose of this chapter is to explore the letter to the Galatians and discover Pauls understanding of the Law as revelatory of Gods nature and character. Here, I will explore the thesis that at Pauls conversion experience on the road to Damascus, his encounter of the risen Jesus initiated a personal reformation in regards to his view of and approach to the Law. Previous to this encounter, Paul viewed the OT Law through the lens of his pharisaical training (probably resulting in a form of Sanders covenantal nomism). But, due to the revelatory nature of his encounter with the risen son of God, Paul now views and approaches the Law in line with its original OT purpose, the revelation of Gods nature and character. Vital to Pauls revelatory experience on the road to Damascus is the fact that Paul now understands Jesus to be the Jewish Messiah (), the Son of God whose presence on earth has initiated the expected eschatological age () in which Jews and Gentiles alike will be declared righteous through their faith in Yahweh and are able to worship together in his presence. It shall come to pass in the latter days that the mountain of the house of Yahweh shall be established as the highest of the mountains, and it shall be lifted up above the hills; and peoples shall flow to it, and many nations shall come, and say: Come, let us go up to the mountain of Yahweh, to the house of the God of Jacob, that he may teach us his ways and that we may walk in his paths. For out of Zion shall go forth the Torah, and the word of Yahweh from Jerusalem. (Mic. 4:1-2 ff.; cf. Is. 2:2-4) This eschatological understanding informs us that: (1) Paul viewed Jesus Christ as the presence of God among his people, and (2) Paul appealed to Galatian church to recognize the work of the Spirit of God as the continued presence of God among his new eschatological people (made up of both Jews and Gentiles). Pauls message to the Galatians centers on the concept of the presence of God among his people. From this central concept springs the understanding that

66

God is the one who justifies his people through their faith in Jesus Christ and this justification continues through the indwelling presence of the Spirit of God. Just as in the OT, the new eschatological people of God are not made righteous through their own action, even action prescribed by the Law. In short, God continues to define the identity of his people through his continued presence among them. In this chapter I will work through the understanding of the presence of God in the letter to the Galatians as it relates to Pauls view of the Law. As Paul explains the revelation of Jesus Christ that he experienced, his approach to the Law as revelatory of Gods nature and character will become clear. The Gospel of the Presence of God To begin the exploration of the presence of God and how it relates to to Pauls view of the Law, it is important to understand the nature and origin of the gospel which Paul preached to the Galatian church. We need to look no further than the opening to Paul's letter to discover the gospel itself in summary form. It is clear that Paul intended the opening statements of 1:1-5 to be much more than a mere precursor or a customary placeholder until the core issues of his correspondence are discussed. Rather, I would hold that, in these opening verses Paul uses a modified customary epistolary greeting to summarize his gospel, a gospel that is intimately linked with the presence of God and will be continuously referred back to within the letter to the Galatians. The letter begins with Paul's claim to apostleship within an intensely theocentric focus. This theocentric focus lays the foundational understanding of the gospel through his letter to the Galatians. ,

67

 . His apostleship, which was probably in question in the Galatian church, was not from man and not through man but through Jesus Christ and God Father who raised him from the dead. Just as , the genitive form of , designates Jesus as the expected OT Messiah (the Anointed One) in the same manner , the genitive form of , designates God as the Father. This is important to our understanding as we look at vv. 3-5 where the title of God the Father creates brackets that begin in v. 3 ( ) and extend to v. 5 ( ). Within these brackets lies the description of God the Father's action on behalf of his children (Paul and the Gentile Galatian audience). In these opening verses of Galatians, Paul is reviewing a theological concept that his audience is well aware. God the Father has acted on their behalf according to his will ( ). Within the description of God's action, we find the Lord Jesus Christ giving himself ( ) on behalf of the sins ( ) of both Paul and his audience. Central to Pauls point is the idea that sin once held the mankind in bondage to this present evil age ( ). With this statement Paul defines an important concept that will continue to serve as a paradigm for understanding God's presence among his new eschatological people. .. 'the present evil age' presupposes the Jewish apocalyptic schema which saw world history as divided into two ages, the present age and the age to come, and the present age as one dominated by evil, in contrast to the glories of the future

68

age.144 The present evil age is characterized by the rule of sin which holds its people in bondage (from which Christ has released us ).145 At first glance, the grace () and peace () from God the Father in v. 3 appears to be nothing more than epistolary rhetoric, but in this context these two theocentric concepts declare so much more. 146 The normal epistolary greeting included a form of grace () that denoted charm, beauty, goodwill, benefit, and gratitude.147 Here, Paul christianizes the word and combines it with the OT concept of peace ( ,)the typical greeting of found in a Jewish

144 James Dunn, The Epistle to the Galatians, (Blacks New Testament Commentary), (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1993), 36. The formulation catches the ambiguity of the Christian situation nicely: as a purposed rescue operation, begun but not yet completed; as still within 'the present evil age', but no longer identified with it or ultimately dependent on it. James Dunn, The Epistle to the Galatians, (Blacks New Testament Commentary),(Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1993), 36. For further discussion, see Richard N. Longenecker, Galatians, (Word Biblical Commentary), vol. 41 (Dallas, TX: Thomas Nelson, 1990), 89.; F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians, (New International Greek Testament Commentary), (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1982), 7677.;W. D. Davies, Paul and Rabbinic Judaism: Some Rabbinic Elements in Pauline Theology (Sigler Pr, 1980), 285-320.; E. P. Sanders, Judaism: Practice and Belief, 63 BCE-66 CE (Trinity Pr Intl, 1992), 279 303. 145 The statement has a confessional ring, and some scholars believe that a confessional or hymnic statement is cited here (cf. also Eph 5:2, 25; 1 Tim 2:6; Titus 2:14). A number of criteria have been specified for detecting pre-Pauline tradition, but the criteria are not objective enough to be decisive, for it is equally possible that Paul himself formulates the significance of Jesus death here. Thomas R. Schreiner, Galatians, (Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament), (Zondervan, 2010), 76. see also Pauls use of here adds weight to the opinion that he is quoting a form of words well known to his readers, which summed up the gospel which they had received and from which, he feared, they were now departing. F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians, (New International Greek Testament Commentary), (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1982), 75. 146 The form is characteristically Pauline; both grace and peace have their full Christian force. Grace is Gods unconditioned good will toward mankind which is decisively expressed in the saving work of Christ (cf. v 6; 2:21); peace is the state of lifepeace with God (Rom. 5:1) and peace with one another (Eph. 2:1418)enjoyed by those who have effectively experienced the divine grace (cf. 5:22; 6:16) Ben Witherington III, Grace in Galatia: A Commentary on Pauls Letter to the Galatians (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998),74. Paul is not just offering typical greetings, grace and peace are clearly from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. They are the source of the grace and peace extended to the Galatians. Paul is talking about some of the benefits the Galatians have and continue to receive from God if they continue to 'walk according to the Spirit.' The greeting is especially pointed here as it is precisely the matters of grace and peace that are at issue in the Galatian assemblies. Ibid., 75. The presence of God (Holy Spirit) is the source of the grace and peace that is associated with the gospel. 147 Ralph P. Martin and Julie L. Wu, Galatians, ed. Clinton E. Arnold, Romans to Philemon (Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary): vol. 3 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2002), 269.

69

letter.148 When we consider these two concepts with Paul's further description of what God has done in accordance with his will, a picture of the description of Gods presence among his people starts to develop. Immediately following the description of God's action, Paul ends the first section of his letter with a doxology: . But, is this merely a praise hymn celebrating God's loftiness and power?149 I would hold that within this doxology Paul brings us to the main point of his Galatian correspondence as he urges the church in Galatia to recognize the presence of God actively dwelling in and among them. It is important to note that there was a significant change between the traditional Greek understanding of the word (to assign reputation or worth)150 and the traditional Jewish usage as reflected in the LXX.151 In the LXX, finds its meaning in the Hebrew word . In reality, the term always speaks of one thing. Yahwehs power as an expression of the divine nature, and the honour ascribed to Yahweh by man is finally no other than an affirmation of this

Ciampa, has connected grace and peace with the Aaronic blessing in Num. 6:24-26 and reckons them as the eschatological blessings given to God's people in Christ. Roy E. Ciampa, The Presence and Function of Scripture in Galatians 1 and 2 (Wissenshftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe, No 102) (Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998), 48.
149 Bruce holds the antecedent to the relative is probably the immediately preceding our God and Father (cf. Phil. 4:20) The glory (Heb. kb) of the God of Israel in the OT is primarily the radiance of his presence; when glory is ascribed to him it denotes the transcendent praise and worship of which he is worthy (cf. Pss. 29:2; 96:8, Ascribe to Yahweh the glory due to his name). is a more emphatic variant (cf. Ps. 84:5 [LXX 83:4]) of the commoner Septuagintalism , meaning for all eternity in the most unlimited sense. F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians, (New International Greek Testament Commentary), (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1982), 77-78. This addition of a doxology to the end of the introductory salutation is unparalleled in Pauls letters (there is a NT parallel in Rev. 1:5b, 6). But the doxology may be prompted here by the gospel summary of v 4 (cf. the doxology of 1 Tim. 1:17 following the amplified faithful saying of vv 15f.). Ibid., 77. 150 Gerhard Kittel, , in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel and Geoffrey W. Friedrich Bromiley, Gerhard, (Grand Rapids, MI:: Eerdmans, 1964), 235. Ones value or worth is measured by his . 151 Gerhard Kittel, , in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel and Geoffrey W. Friedrich Bromiley, Gerhard, (Grand Rapids, MI:: Eerdmans, 1964), 242.

148

70

nature.152 The phrase is also used frequently in the LXX to describe the moments when Yahweh manifests his presence to his people (the giving of the Law (Ex. 20), in the tabernacle (Lev. 9:23), the temple (2 Ch. 5:14)). In the LXX and therefore in the Bible generally acquires its distinctive sense as a term for this divine nature or essence either in its invisible or its perceptible form.153 I would suggest that, based on Pauls use of , We are to understand the doxology of Gal. 1:5 as having to do with the manifest presence of God. It is also important to note that in v. 5 the word makes another appearance and rather than be considered solely an idiom for the idea for eternity (forever and ever), should be recognized as the

152

Ibid., 244.

153 Ibid., 244, emphasis mine. While there are a few instances of men or women in high position receiving (1 Macc. 10:60, 86, Jos., Ant. 8, 166), the majority of contemporary non-NT usages seem to focus mostly on Yahwehs manifestation of himself among his people. There seem to be many descriptions of mans physical experience and participation of the of God. Some example are: the description of the Gods Cosmic Temple (Sir 43:9, 12; 50:7), temple participation in the radiance of God in the next life (Wsd. 18:24), a description the earthly temple and the high Priest serving in Gods presence (1 Esdr 6:9;; 2 Macc 5:20) and a direct experience with the presence of God Himself. (Philo, Spec. Leg. 1, 45). Significant to our study is the presence of God and/or his Temple in almost every instance of non-Hellenistic Jewish writings. This continues to point to the fact that the traditional Greek usage has diminished (or never was a significant factor) in Jewish circles and the OT Hebrew idea of kabad has (or is becoming) solidified in as the prominent meaning for . Jewish thinkers known for their Hellenistic allegiances (Philo and Josephus) seem to still use the word in its traditional sense but cannot be trusted to correctly convey the now Jewish OT meaning. Also important is the use of the verb as it shows men being glorified, not on the basis of their own intrinsic value, but because of their trust in the word of God. The NT usage of the word seems to follow the line of interpretation developed in the LXX and continued in Jewish apocryphal literature. There is no semblance of the traditional Greek usage found among any of the NT authors. Kittle believes that the idea of divine mode of being comes to the forefront in the use of the word . Ibid., 247. Gods glory was always present but now it is manifest to man so that it can be actively acknowledged and praised. This understanding seems to be uniform among the NT authors. Even writers obviously schooled in Greek (Luke and the author of Hebrews) use the term in this way. Significant to our study is the fact that the same word used to describe the active presence of God among his people is now used of Jesus. With the exception of John, the majority of the uses of the word are related to Jesus post-resurrection appearances. Here we find the risen Christ as the lord of glory (1 Cor. 2:8) and find ourselves waiting for the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ. (Titus 2:13) Also significant are NT uses of the word and in the context of Holy Spirit empowered service. In 1 Peter 4:10 we are reminded that each of us has been given a gift that will empower us to serve each as good stewards of Gods grace. ...in order that in everything God may be glorified () through Jesus Christ. To him belong glory () and dominion forever and ever. Amen. Peter then goes on to remind the believers that they are bless (despite insults) because the Spirit of glory () and of God rests upon you. (4:14) Paul also connect the Holy Spirit to glory in several passages. (2 Cor 3:8, 18; Eph. 1:17, 3:16; Phil 3:3; 1 Tim. 3:16) The above passages show that the concept of and flow directly from the OT, through the 2nd Temple Period directly into the NT and are applied to each member of the Trinity.

71

opposite of which Paul has described earlier. In short, Paul desires that his audience recognize that God the Father has willed their rescued from this present evil age and that they should live in accordance with his presence, a presence that extends into the ages of ages.154 The death of Christ and the rescue of his people from are both accomplished according to the will of God ( ). The notion here is of rescue from the evil of the age, not removal from the age itself.155 Jesus, the Anointed One who carries with him the divine presence, has initiated a break from . This presence continues with the indwelling Spirit of God, ushering those who have been rescued into God's . God continues the graceful blessing of his promised presence, creating a new age signified by his inclusion of Gentiles as heirs to the promise of Gen. 12. Rather than view v. 5 solely as a doxology that neatly completes the epistolary greeting section of his letter, it would only make sense to see that Paul is using this doxology to compare God's age to . Rather than view as sense of honor or praise,156 we should see that Paul had in mind the presence of God extending from this into eternity, the ages of ages. Martyn holds that Pauls language of presence becomes even more explicit with given the placed after the doxology.

The use of the preposition also seems to hold some significance here. Paul seems to use this in conjunction with motion towards or to something (ie. 1:17)
155 Ben Witherington III, Grace in Galatia: A Commentary on Pauls Letter to the Galatians (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998), 76-77. cf. Hans Dieter Betz, Galatians (Hermeneia: A Critical & Historical Commentary on the Bible), (Philadelphia: Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 1989), 42. 156

154

contra. Ibid., 77. 72

... having pronounce a doxology to God (1:5a), Paul brings the Galatians climatically into God's presence by inviting them to utter the word 'Amen!' It is a signal of his conviction that his own words can and will be come the active word of God, because God will be present as the letter is read to the Galatians in their services of worship. One might even say that by using the word amen, Paul intends to rob the Galatians of the lethal luxury of considering themselves observers. With him, they stand in the God's presence. Fundamentally, then, they a dealing with God, not merely with Paul (1:6).157 After pronouncing anyone presenting a gospel that is different from the gospel previously preached by Paul as , Paul then discusses the revelatory origin of his gospel: , , . (1:11-12) Paul makes it clear that the gospel that he gospelized was not according to man nor did he receive it or was he taught it through man. Rather he had received it and was being taught it through revelation of Jesus Christ ( ). While there is little doubt that Paul is here alluding to his experience on the road to Damascus, there has been much conjecture on the nature and content of this revelation. The Nature and Origin of Pauls Gospel As has been discussed in the previous chapter, Law (or Torah) itself was considered a graceful gift from God that serves to reveal his nature and character. It is for this very reason that I have posited the thesis that at the revelation of Jesus Christ, Paul experienced a personal reformation retuning to his OT theological heritage and now views the Law as an important part of Gods self-revelatory program. He no longer holds the idea that keeping of the Law was the
157 J. Louis Martyn, Galatians, (The Anchor Yale Bible Commentaries), (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004), 106. Fung views the amen in a similar manner: The declaration may contain at the same time a summons to acknowledge God's glory and to live in the light of it; should this be so, the hearers responsive 'Amen' to Paul's 'Amen' (cf. 1 Cor 14:6) as the letter was read would take on added significance as a pledge to endeavor to ascribe glory to God by their lives, as well as an endorsement of Paul's ascription of glory to God at this point in the letter. Ronald Y. K. Fung, The Epistle to the Galatians, (The New International Commentary on the New Testament),(Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1988), 43.

73

means to maintain his covenant status. In short, due to the encounter with the risen Jesus Christ and its revelatory nature, Paul's understanding of the Law was radically reformed from his upbringing as an ethnocentric Second Temple Pharisee, to that of a theocentric Torah-centered Israelite. This reformed theocentric perspective would be qualitatively different from his former life in Judaism as a being extremely zealous for the traditions of his fathers ( ). Previous to the coming of Christ, Gods presence in the Jerusalem Temple was thought to be accessed through acts of ritual purity (i.e. sacrifice, ritual cleansing, etc.).158 Only those who bore the sign of circumcision in their flesh, declaring their covenant membership, were able to claim to be Gods elect people, chosen by his grace. Now, at the revelation event on the road to Damascus, Paul is comes face to face with the presence of God in Jesus the Son of God who does not reside in the Jerusalem Temple and was not accessed through prescribed ritual. And, in a complete twist on Pauls zealousness, Jesus himself commissions Paul to preach the gospel of his presence to the Gentiles! Paul makes it abundantly clear that his audience knew his history, . The prepositional phrase shows up twice in in the book of Galatians, both within the description of Paul's former way of life (13,14).159 This description came in to use during the Second Temple period and was used to distinguish those who were being faithful to their Jewish heritage. 'Judaism', as we may say, as a description of the religion of the Jews, only emerged in the Maccabean revolt, a fact which
158 For an interesting discussion on the Temple and control held by the religious elite K. C. Hanson, Palestine in the Time of Jesus: Social Structures and Social Conflicts, 2 ed. (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2008), 123-145. 159

In fact, this paragraph is the only place in the entire New Testament where the word Judaism is used. 74

stamped its character as fiercely nationalistic and loyal to the Law, in reaction to those who attempted to eliminate its distinctiveness (as expressed particularly in its sacrificial system, its feasts, circumcision and food laws).160 Dunn holds that it is no accident that Paul chose to use this word at this point in his description of his past life. The implication is that in his younger days he had seen Judaism as a heritage to be maintained with whole-hearted commitment and to be defended with vigour.161 Paul describes his progression as beyond his contemporaries in his own generation ( ). And, most important to our study, Paul states that he existed as exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers ( ). Martyn explains that the phrase is a typical expression by which virtually any Jew of the time referred to the law, the venerable tradition studied under the guidance of senior scholars.162 But, I would hold that there is an extremely important distinction to be made here, lest we confuse the tradition Paul is speaking of with the Law of the OT. This should be recognized for what Paul is trying to communicate within the structure of his background of Pharisaic Judaism ( ). The Pharisaic concern was to live in accord with and to defend as necessary the traditional explanations and rulings (the oral Halakhah), which drawn from the Torah, had already gained, in Pharisaic eyes at

160 James Dunn, The Epistle to the Galatians, (Blacks New Testament Commentary), (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1993), 56. 161 162

Ibid., 56-57.

J. Louis Martyn, Galatians, (The Anchor Yale Bible Commentaries), (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004), 155. Martyn defines the Law that Paul was devoted to as tradition as distinguished from apocalyptic revelation, thus lying on the human side of the divine/human antinomy. For in speaking of these venerable ancestral traditions, Paul gives no indication that they have their origin in a revelatory act of God. Ibid. 75

least, the same status as the Torah itself.163 This obviously ethnocentric approach to Gods will is then contrasted in vv. 15-16 as Paul relates the internal consequences of his revelatory experience. Paul describes Gods action on his behalf, an action predicated on God's will ( ).164As stated before, on the Damascus road, Paul experiences the divine presence of the Son of God.165 Through this revelatory encounter he has now come to realize that his former way of life ran counter to God's will. Paul's use of the prepositional phrase is more than just an objective experience, the implication is rather that he wished at this point to express the personal transformation effected by this revelation from heaven.166 In short, Paul experienced a heart change that included a calling away from the very thing that directed his zeal, the ethnocentric tradition of his fathers. 167 Herein lies a very important distinction that must be made: If Paul wanted his audience to know that his zealousness was founded in the Law itself, he would have said so. Rather, within the recollection of his past --a past that was familiar to the Galatian church-- he explains
163 James Dunn, The Epistle to the Galatians, (Blacks New Testament Commentary), (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1993), 60. 164 William Arndt, Frederick W. Danker, and Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature., 3 ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 404.

1:16 . This is the mentioned in v. 12. The reference is to Pauls Damascus-road experience in which, as he puts it elsewhere, I have see Jesus our Lord (1 Cor. 9:1), last of all he appeared [in resurrection] also to me (1 Cor. 15:8), I was apprehended by Christ Jesus (Phil. 3:12). The prepositional phrase could be a substitute for the simple dative (cf. , Rom. 1:19; , 2 Cor. 4:3), but here it probably points to the inwardness of the experience. For Paul the outward vision and the inward illumination coincided: Jesus, whom he persecuted, was revealed as the Son of God, and the revelation was the act of God himself. F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians, (New International Greek Testament Commentary), (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1982), 92-93. James Dunn, The Epistle to the Galatians, (Blacks New Testament Commentary), (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1993), 64. Dunn also says that when Paul desired to use a dative with the word reveal, an instance that would be translated to me he did not hesitate to do so (cf. 1 Cor. 2:10; 14:30; Phil. 3:15). Dunn goes on to say that this transformation was not so much about Paul's person but about his commitment and purpose.
167 It is important to note the continuity that Paul creates between Yahweh of the OT and , who continues to serve as the implied subject. God is the one who does the revealing and, here, he choses to reveal his own Son in Paul. I would suggest that Paul continues to use God as the subject to explain the continuity between his encounter with the risen Messiah and the OT scriptures. 166

165

76

that his former life in Judaism was defined by a zealousness to the oral Halakhah that surrounded the Law, not to the Law itself. I would posit that the ethnocentric teachings of Pharisaic Judaism were, by Pauls own admission, the interpretive lens he applied to Torah as he structured his life . The revelatory encounter of the risen Jesus becomes all that more significant in that it does not prompt Paul to reject the Law but, through the experience of the divine presence of the Son of God (the Messiah/Anointed One), Pauls Second Temple Pharisaic interpretive lens was removed and Paul was able recapture the original intent of the Law, the revelation of Gods nature and character. The ethnocentric identity Paul had previously recognized as a graceful act of God (his election a Jew and set apartness as a Pharisee) was drastically reformed at his encounter with Son of God. Pauls calling now held a deeper connection to Gods salvific plan, a plan that included Gentiles and took place in the new eschatological age. The raising of Christ, moreover, was specially relevant to Pauls commissioning, for it was his Damascus-road experience that simultaneously confronted him with the risen Christ, thereby convincing him that God had indeed raised Christ from the dead, and brought home to him the call of the risen Christ to be his apostle to the Gentile world. The call was Christs but it was also Gods, for it was God who revealed his Son to Paul in that confrontation (vv. 15f.).168 ! Encountering the risen Son of God brought Paul back to the original OT understanding of

God's active presence and initiated his acceptance of the fact that God's presence now operated differently breaking into and delivering Jew and Gentile

F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians, (New International Greek Testament Commentary), (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1982), 73. In this description, Paul is also defining tight boundary lines around the perception of his former life in order to later contrast it with his his calling to the Gentiles. This is seen in the tenses of the Greek verbs: whereas the three verbs of vv. 1314 are imperfects (describing remote incomplete action), the verbs of vv. 1517, describing the abrupt change in Paul's life, are aorist (describing the action as a whole). Scot McKnight, Galatians, (The NIV Application Commentary), (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1995), 72. 77

168

alike.169 Paul's understanding of God's active presence was no longer with its focus on Temple centered worship and ethnocentric Halakhah law interpretation. Now, Paul recognized that the Son of God, who carried the presence of Yahweh himself as the Messiah/ Anointed One moving among his people and acting on their behalf. God has been acting on Paul's behalf while he was still in his mother's womb ( ). Paul's quotation of Isaiah 49:1-6 becomes even more obvious in v. 16 as he describes the purpose of his calling which emphasizes God's work through the use of the subjunctive, . Just as in the description of his apostolic calling ( ), Paul describes his calling through his [God's] grace ( ). These are two vital elements of the content of the revelation Paul received as he encountered the risen Jesus. In fact, I believe we should regard this Christophany in a similar manner at the OT manifestations of Yahweh's presence as it serves to further reveal God's nature and character to Paul, a revelation that lined up with the OT understanding of the presence of Yahweh among his people. The presence of the Son of God, and subsequently the Spirit of God, is now understood by Paul to define the people of God. To describe this event as an 'apocalypse' not only underlined its heavenly authority but also implied that it had eschatological significance, that is, as the key which unlocked the mystery of God's

169 When Paul speaks in 2 Cor. 4:4 of seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, and goes on to say that God has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ (2 Cor. 4:6), his choice of language is most probably based on his Damascus-road vision. If so, he saw Jesus our Lord then in a form which identified him not only as the Son of God but also as the image of God, the reflexion of the divine glory. F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians, (New International Greek Testament Commentary), (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1982), 93.

78

purpose of his creation, the keystone of the whole arch of human history.170 This will become extremely evident as Paul brings into his discussion the idea of the Abrahamic promise (3:6 ff.). Paul later refers back to this revelatory experience as the reason he visits Jerusalem a second time, this time to lay his revealed gospel before the pillars of the Jerusalem church. Paul describes himself as going up according to revelation and laying before them the gospel according to revelation ( ). Here, I believe, the prepositional phrase continues to govern both the verbs and .171 Both aorist verbs are in the first person singular speaking of Paul's action. The only break in the sentence comes with the relative clause which further describes the gospel itself but in the context of Paul's action. In fact, the only other time in the NT that the aorist middle form of is used is in Acts 25:14. Here Festus is is laying out the case against Paul, a case that did nor originate with Festus but with Jews who had made their case known previously to Festus. The same usage of the verb also is found in 2 Macc. 3:9, where Heliodorus communicates information that he has received from someone else to the High Priest. In Gal. 2:2 the use of this rare verb only makes sense when governed by the prepositional phrase , leading us to conclude that Paul goes to Jerusalem and meets with the pillars of the church to discuss the gospel he has
170 James Dunn, The Epistle to the Galatians, (Blacks New Testament Commentary), (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1993), 53. The linguistic turn taken from Pauls use of apocalypse to erchomi and exapostello shows that in Galatians Paul's apocalyptic is not focused on God's unveiling something that was previously hidden, as though it had been eternally standing behind a curtain (contrast 1 Cor 2:9-10). The genesis of Paul's apocalyptic - as we see it in Galatians- lies in the apostle's certainty that God has invaded the present evil age by sending Christ and his Spirit into it. J. Louis Martyn, Galatians, (The Anchor Yale Bible Commentaries), (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004), 99. On the understanding that the revelation of the gospel to Paul was more than an unveiling act by God, rather it was invasive, It was in that event that Paul received the gospel he preaches to the Gentiles. In a word, the gospel happened to Paul when God stepped on the scene, invading is life in Christ. J. Louis Martyn, Galatians, (The Anchor Yale Bible Commentaries), (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004), 144.

171

contra. Fung, Bruce, Dunn, etc. 79

received according to revelation. This makes sense because at the revelation of of the Son of God Paul not only received the apostolic authority that places him on equal terms with the other Jerusalem apostles, he also received the core concept of the gospel of Gods presence among his new eschatological people he had already been preaching. Pauls Rebuke of Peter 2:14-21 Following Paul's recounting of his second visit to Jerusalem (2:1-10), he relates his rebuke of Peter at Antioch. Peter was acting hypocritical according to decision made by the pillars of the church (of which Peter was one) concerning the work of the Holy Spirit among the uncircumcised Gentile Christians (2:8).172 It is important to note that Paul states he received the right right hand of fellowship along with the recognition of the grace given to him ( )(9). In other words, they recognized the validity of the gospel proclaimed by Paul. They did not require Titus to be circumcised (2:3), nor did they add anything to the Pauline gospel (2:6). Instead, they realized that they were partners with Paul and Barnabas in proclaiming the same gospel.173 Peter, by removing himself from table fellowship with the Gentile Christians --in response to pressure (either direct or indirect) from the circumcision party-- was acting hypocritical in regards to the decision he took part in at Jerusalem

172 Cf. Roy E. Ciampa, The Presence and Function of Scripture in Galatians 1 and 2 (Wissenshftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe, No 102) (Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998), 166-168. For an interesting discussion on the OT background of the verbs , , and the noun . Although it appears that Ciampa makes some pretty heavy assumptions later regarding the Jewish halakha and the Mosaic Law, he fails to differentiate the two and thus misses the point of what Paul is trying to accomplish. Ibid., 170-177. Rather then struggling to find a new place for the law in his own theological paradigm, I believe Paul is trying to show the value of the law itself as a past revelatory medium that has been superseded by Christ's indwelling presence. 173 Thomas R. Schreiner, Galatians, (Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament), (Zondervan, 2010), 130.

80

It is also important to note that, according to my reading of the Greek text, Paul's rebuke extends past the normally considered one verse comprehensive rebuke of v. 14.174 In fact, Paul's rebuke, which begins in v. 14 and extends to v. 21, serves as an extended theological lesson to Peter concerning the depth of his hypocrisy, a hypocrisy that is then equated to the Galatians foolishness which Paul addresses beginning in chapter 3. Bruce translates the opening of Paul's rebuke as: If you, Jew as you are (by birth and upbringing), live in the Gentile and not in the Jewish way (as Cephas had been doing habitually in Antioch, and presumably in other Gentile communities in which he found himself from time to time), how do you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?175 Paul then continues his rebuke of Peter with theological explanation of his point. We (Paul and Peter) are naturally born Jews and not from Sinners from the Gentiles ( ). Here Paul continues the use of the preposition with the genitive to describe the idea of source. 176 He

174 Many scholars follow H. D. Betz, Galatians: A Commentary on Pauls Letter to the Churches in Galatia (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979) in the way he divides the letter to the Galatians into rhetorical categories with 2:15-21viewed as the Propositio to the Narratio of 1:13-2:14. Witherington calls 1:13-2:14 the Narratio II which, by his definition, serves to set the stage for the essential proposition and advice the rhetor wished to give his audience, or if the marshaling of facts could serve to correct some mistaken impressions about the speaker and so improve his ethos, making the audience more receptive to the advice he would give following the narratio Ben Witherington III, Grace in Galatia: A Commentary on Pauls Letter to the Galatians (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998), 95. Such categories can be extremely helpful in our exegesis of Pauls letters as long as we are careful to fully explore the substance of the propositio in both its forward and backward looking function. Witherington falls into the temptation of generalizing the propositio to quickly, seeing a define break at the end of v. 14, ending the rebuke of Peter with a rhetorical fitness that leaves his Peter silent. Pauls interlocutors have no answer to the truth of the Gospel, the argument in Pauls question is presented as irrefutable, for Peter is rendered silent. Ibid., 159-169. Longenecker thinks that the propositio of 2:15-21 should not be considered just as part of Pauls speech to Peter, though it springs immediately from that, but as the summary of all that Paul has argued in 1:11-2:14 and as the introductory transition to 3:1-4:11 Richard N. Longenecker, Galatians, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 41 (Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1990), 80-81.

F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians, (New International Greek Testament Commentary), (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1982), 132.
175 176

Began in 1:15 with mothers womb language 81

speaks of Peter and his own ethno-religious heritage, a thing that they were naturally born into, as differentiated from Gentile Sinners.177 In this verse Paul is laying the groundwork for the understanding of his subsequent discussion concerning the Law. Paul and Peter are naturally Jews, sons of Abraham and members of Gods covenant people. Within their own religious tradition they have been taught the stories of the faithful Israelites before them and Gods sovereign work on their behalf. But, at the time of Pauls rebuke of Peter, they had both experienced Jesus, the Jewish Messiah, and the understanding of their shared heritage had come in line with this experience. Paul calls this rich heritage to the forefront as he continues to speak to Peter: and knowing () that man is not being [made] righteous from () the works of the law. The knowledge concerning the source of the righteousness of man comes from the rich ethnoreligious heritage that Paul and Peter share. Obviously, when Paul brings up the topic of heritage he is not talking about the pharisaical traditions of his fathers (1:14). Rather, this is a Jewishness that Paul and Peter both share in common and is based on each apostles experience of the risen Jewish Messiah. It is important to note that when Paul speaks concerning the Law, with exception to his brief autobiographical pre-revelation experience (1:13-16), he does so from a post-conversion perspective, a perspective that has been informed by the revelation of Christ, and validated by the work of the indwelling Spirit of God. In short, Paul speaks from an perspective and not from an perspective.178
177 The word became a technical term to describe a radical or practical alienation from the Jewish Law...The Gentile was a in virtue of his not being a Jew and his failure to regulate his conduct according to the Torah. Roy E. Ciampa, The Presence and Function of Scripture in Galatians 1 and 2 (Wissenshftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe, No 102) (Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998), 180. 178 cf. James Dunn, The Epistle to the Galatians, (Blacks New Testament Commentary), (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1993), 82.

82

From their common heritage, Paul describes the knowledge (which he and Peter both hold) that the works of the law are not the source of man being made righteous. Rather, man is being made righteous through faith in/of Jesus Christ.179 Paul is stating the the Law itself never was the source for righteousness, a fact that Peter and Paul's true ethno-religious heritage had always held. This understanding of their ethno-religious heritage does not, I believe, stem from the traditions of second Temple Judaism. Rather, it is in direct line with the understanding of the Law from the perspective of an OT Israelite. Through faith in Jesus the Son of God, a man is made righteous, not by any work of the law because the Law itself was never purposed for anything of the sort! It was to reveal the source of righteousness, the Righteous God. This is why Paul continues his thought with and we (Paul and Peter) are placing our faith into ( as transitive) Jesus Christ in order that we might be made righteous from () faith in Christ and not from () the works of the law. The source of righteousness is and the . 180 Paul then broadens his main point with a general statement concerning all humanity (Jew and Gentile alike), with the works of the law as their source, not one will be made righteous ( ) (2:16).

179 For a summary of the ongoing debate whether this should be translated faith in Jesus Christ or faith of Jesus Christ see James Dunn, The Epistle to the Galatians, (Blacks New Testament Commentary), (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1993), 138-139. and bibliography in Richard N. Longenecker, Galatians, (Word Biblical Commentary), vol. 41 (Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1990), 87. I agree with Dunn when he says ... The phrase is still best taken as expressing faith in Christ, that is, acceptance of the reliability of what is said by and about Christ (acceptance of the gospel message - 3:2-5) and trust in, reliance upon the Christ of whom the gospel thus spoke. James Dunn, The Epistle to the Galatians, (Blacks New Testament Commentary), (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1993), 139.

Ciampa sees the justification by faith language in v. 16 as reflecting elements from Gen. 15:6, Ps. 142:3, and Hab. 2:4 alluding to the referencecPaul will make in 3:11. Here he quotes Gen. 15:6 but drops the verb and adds Habbakkuk's language of . Roy E. Ciampa, The Presence and Function of Scripture in Galatians 1 and 2 (Wissenshftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe, No 102) (Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998), 194-196. 83

180

In 2:17-21 Paul, having already established that the source of righteousness is Christ himself and not the Law (or any works born out of the law), shows just how deep Peter's hypocrisy runs. And if (while) seeking to (be) righteous in Christ, we (Peter and Paul) are found also sinners ourselves, then is Christ a deacon of sin? Certainly not! (17). 181 Here Paul brings us back to Peter's original hypocrisy, removing himself from table fellowship with the Gentile brothers. Paul has made it clear that only place to seek righteousness is in Christ, but Peter was afraid of being found by the circumcision party and labeled a sinner. Paul confronts this hypocrisy head on using language from v. 15 () to directly equate himself with the Gentile brothers who had once been considered sinners ( ) in the eyes of Jewish purity tradition.182 The key point Paul is making here is: the righteousness that finds its source in the Son of God cannot tainted by what was considered an impure Gentile sinner. The Messiah of both Jews and Gentiles cannot be considered a deacon of sin ( ). Gentiles themselves were worthy of Peters presence during table fellowship because Jesus' death on the cross had initiated a new eschatological age in which Gods presence indwelt Jew and Gentile alike. This mutual indwelling was an indication that the boundaries of purity associated with being in the presence of God had been erased. In the past, Gentiles were considered sinners due

181 ...'sin' here in the characteristic Pauline sense of personified power which exercises a fatal attraction over humankind, turning it upon itself, forgetful of its creatureliness, and prey to animal appetite and death (particularly Rom. 5:12-8:10). The image of Christ as a 'servant' will almost certainly be an echo of the context in Antioch, since the word still retained much of its original sense of 'table waiter'. James Dunn, The Epistle to the Galatians, (Blacks New Testament Commentary), (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1993), 141.

Bird holds that the problem was not simply the [the purity of the] food, but the company in which the food was consumed. Pauls opponents are not called those of the food but those of [i.e. for] circumcision. Michael Bird, The Saving Righteousness of God: Studies on Paul, Justification and the New Perspective (Paternoster Biblical Monographs) (Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2008), 130. 84

182

to the purity regulations of the Law. Now, through faith in the Messiah, they are also being found righteous and able to be in the presence of God.183 For I have died with the Law through the Law, in order that I might live with God (19). The Law itself has provided, through its revelatory function, the means necessary to know and understand God's will (1:4). This will not only include the death of his Son to free us from the present evil age, but Paul also shows that it has required Peter and himself to partake in the sacrificial death of the Messiah ( ) so that they may live in God's presence ( ). In the past age, the Law had provided a sacrificial system of worship in which the people of Israel could take part in as an outward act of their inward spiritual devotion. In the OT, this heart devotion had always been a matter of faith and was never about the work of sacrifice itself. This faith was to always be rooted in the nature and character of Yahweh, a nature and character that he gracefully revealed through his promised presence, covenant, and Law. Paul reminds Peter of this as he works through the place of the Law in the . By dying with the Law Paul relates that the purpose of the Law was fulfilled, living with God. Paul agains uses presence language ( ) to show that the original revelatory purpose of the Law is being fulfilled. The Law has revealed that God is with his people; its sacrificial acts did not imply a burden to Gods chosen people but reveal the divine prescription for worship whereby they could express their heart-felt devotion to God. The same God who has blessed his people with his presence reveled his nature and character through his

In passages dealing with the eschatological pilgrimage of the nations Gentiles come to God as Gentiles and do not proselytize. In Isa. 2:2-4 and Mic. 4:1-4 the Gentiles are pictured as receiving instruction concerning the ways of Yahweh from the law itself. Michael Bird, The Saving Righteousness of God: Studies on Paul, Justification and the New Perspective (Paternoster Biblical Monographs) (Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2008), 134. 85

183

will. The Law created the theocentric context within by which the presence and subsequent death of the Son of God could be recognized as the supreme sacrificial act of deliverance from this age . At the death of Christ, the Law itself dies and those under the Law who have put their faith in Christ (Paul and Peter) die with it in order to live in the presence of God. The figure is deliberately bold, designed to emphasize the finality of the death which has put an end to the old order and interposed a barrier between it and the new life in Christ (cf. 5:24; 6:14). The perfect tense emphasizes that participation in the crucified Christ has become the believers settled way of life.184 The age of the Law had ended and those who place their faith in Jesus Christ are now able to take part in the God's age through Christ's indwelling presence. Most important to our study is Paul's understanding of his life in the presence of God. In v. 20 he claims I no longer live and Christ lives in me and that which I now live in the flesh, I live in faith with the Son of God. Paul, a Jew who has died to the Law, a death that was facilitated by the Law itself, is describing how he continues to live in the presence of God while still existing physically in the flesh.185 Presently indwelt by the Anointed One of God ( ), the same Christ who loved Paul and gave himself on behalf on Paul's behalf ( ), Paul continues to live in faith in the presence of the Son of God ( ).
184 F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians, (New International Greek Testament Commentary), (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1982), 144. Bruce recognizes the transition that takes place in the shared death of Christ but makes the conflates the idea of the curse of the law with the law itself. Rather, the law is God's graceful prescription for worship in the presence of God.

Dunn holds that this indwelling of Christ is experientially the same thing as the indwelling of the Holy Spirit: the awareness of a new focus of identity expressed in different goals and new inner dynamic, with Christ as the inspiration and Christ-likeness the paradigm ('mystical' if you like, though many are suspicious of the word's connotations). James Dunn, The Epistle to the Galatians, (Blacks New Testament Commentary), (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1993), 145. 86

185

In v. 20, the concept of living in flesh ( ) is introduced as synonymous with the idea of this present evil age. As Paul explains how he lives in flesh ( ) while at the same time living in faith ( ) in the presence of the Son of God, he describes the difference that the indwelling presence of Christ makes as the believer continues physical existence within the present evil age. The indwelling presence of Christ that Jews and Gentiles hold in common is now what defines and empowers life itself, a commonality Peter denied through his hypocritical actions. With sledgehammer force Paul ends the rebuke of Peter by comparing Peter's action of removing himself from table fellowship with annulling the grace of God ( ) and, by his actions insinuating that righteousness could in fact come through the Law ( ). This nullifying of God's grace in turn robbed the death of Christ of its purpose ( ). It is important to note this final word to Peter is not against the Law itself.186 Rather, the death of Christ has been consistently represented in Galatians as freeing from the bondage of this present evil age (1:4; 2:20) and the grace of God has been consistently represented in conjunction with God's calling (1:6, 15, 2:7-9). Peter's actions were not only contrary to what he knew to be true about the presence of God in the life of a believer, they were also contrary to his calling to preach the gospel to the circumcised (2:7-9). In fact, he lead other Jews astray distorting the gospel for them, as well as for the Gentile believers he had separated himself from. The circumcision party on the other hand was presenting a gospel not in line with the truth. The message Peter sent with his actions communicated that Christ's death did not accomplish the
It is clear from v. 16 that Paul does not think that Christ died for nothing and consequently he does not think righteousness or justification comes through the Law. Christs action (not our faith) is here set over against the Law as that which puts the believer in right relationship with God, and in fact one has this ongoing relationship with God because of what Christ did. Ben Witherington III, Grace in Galatia: A Commentary on Pauls Letter to the Galatians (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998), 193. 87
186

freedom from this present evil age that it intended. Rather, Peter actions communicated that Christ's death had no effect on the transition from (where the Law served as a graceful gift to reveal God's nature and character to his people) into God's which is now signified by his indwelling presence. Pauls Rebuke of the Galatians The transition from Paul's rebuke of Peter to the direct rebuke of his audience is made perfectly clear at the beginning of Gal. 3 with his direct address to the foolish Galatians ( ). Bringing the crucifixion of Jesus Christ to the forefront of his address, Paul asks his Gentile audience a series of questions concerning the source () of the presence of God's Spirit in their midst. Here, Paul changes his wording a bit to relate to the Galatian's experience with the Spirit of God actively manifesting his presence among members of the Galatian church. Throughout the rebuke of the Galatians, Paul consistently refers to the theme of faith and continues to maintain the theme of two different ages that he introduced in his gospel summary (1:3-5). Where Peter and Paul had experienced the presence of the risen Jesus Christ, the Galatians had experienced the presence of the Spirit continually working his power among them (3:5).187 Here also, the Spirit is contrasted with the works of the law ( ) and flesh through a series of questions designed to provide an obvious antithesis to the truth he is trying to convey.

The present participles and probably imply that this divine activity still continues: Paul is not simply referring to something which the Galatians had witnessed once for all when first they believed the gospel. F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians, (New International Greek Testament Commentary), (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1982), 151. 88

187

Even though the crucifixion of Christ had been vividly represented to the Galatians in his gospel preaching, 188 a crucifixion that Paul had just finished explaining, the Galatians were now seeking to perfect in the flesh ( ) what had begun with the Spirit of God ( ) (3). The indwelling presence of the Spirit of God was particularly evident in the members of the Galatian church but, in their foolishness, they failed to recognize that the same Spirit they had received through their faith in Jesus Christ, the same Spirit that was actively manifesting himself among them, would signify their status as righteous in the presence of God.189 Just as could not make a Jew righteous (because the Law was never purposed to do such a thing), they could by no stretch of the imagination establish or maintain a Gentile (who had put his faith in the Jewish Messiah) in righteousness. To believe this as possible was foolishness and considered by Paul as equivalent to Peter's hypocrisy. Abraham Paul then brings Abraham into the discussion in order to equate Abrahams faith in God to Pauls previously discussed faith in Christ. In the same manner that Paul and Peter were believing in Jesus Christ so that they might be made righteous from faith in Christ ( ) (2:16), Abraham believed in God and he was reckoned to God in righteousness ( , ) (3:6, cf. Gen. 15:6). Abraham's righteousness was born from his faith in God and Paul and Peter's

The word used here, literally means to post a notice in public, like a modern bulletin boardthe ancient method of giving out notices of a political or social event. Ralph P. Martin and Julie L. Wu, Galatians, ed. Clinton E. Arnold, (Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary), (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2002), 281. Fee recognizes that 3:5 indicates that the Galatians have no relationship to the Jewish Law, Paul appeals specifically to their ongoing experience of the Spirt as dynamically present among them with miraculous deeds -- one can scarcely interpret the two present tenses otherwise (God gives the Spirit and works miracles among you). Gordon D. Fee, Paul, the Spirit, and the People of God (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Pub, 1996), 201. 89
189

188

righteousness was born from their faith in Christ. With the force of an imperative (), Paul explains that those who are born of faith ( ) are to be considered sons of Abraham. In fact, scripture had even foretold of God making Gentiles righteous ! Even more telling is Paul's explanation of God's fulfillment of the original promise of Gen. 12 through the presence of the Spirit of God in the Galatian church. The Promise itself is equated to the gospel that Paul preaches and God's presence is called to the forefront of this gospel message. The Spirit of God has manifested himself in and among the Gentile believers of the Galatian church due to their faith (in God and the Son of God). Now Gentiles, along with those of Jewish ethnic origin, can be considered righteous and sons of Abraham (7-9). Through the Spirit they are taking part in the same blessing that was promised to Abraham, God's continued presence among his people. This presence is what defined the people of God not works of the law or any kind of ethnocentric action. The new age that has been foretold in scripture has now been initiated by the coming of the Christ. The presence of the Spirit in power is an unmistakable sign that the new age had dawned (cf. Joel 2:28ff.)...it displaces the law and rules out of court every attempt to achieve righteousness by works which the law prescribes. Through his death on the cross, Jew and Gentile alike are freed from this present evil age and, through faith, are indwelt by the Spirit of God.190 Scripture itself (which includes the Law) has born witness to this fact, a fact which Paul now understands clearly due to the revelation of Christ he has experienced.

F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians, (New International Greek Testament Commentary), (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1982), 151-152. Fee sees the Spirit as fulfilling the eschatological promises regarding the inclusion of Gentiles into to the people of God. Paul says [in Gal. 3:14] the fulfillment of this promised blessing for the Gentiles is in their having experienced the Spirit as a living and dynamic reality. Gordon D. Fee, Paul, the Spirit, and the People of God (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Pub, 1996), 60. 90

190

In this context Paul continues to compare the two ages in 3:10-14191 and describe the law's OT function as being a graceful provision by God for the transgressions of his people while his presence dwelt among them in the present evil age (3:19-20). The Law in and of itself could in no way give life, only God himself holds that kind of power. To claim this of the Law would be an affront to God's original purpose for the Law, as a graceful revelation given to his chosen people concerning his worship and reveal his holiness within a fallen sinful age (3:21-22). In this way, the Law served as a positive , 192 creating a revelatory context within which the coming of Jesus Christ was the logical fulfillment of the Promise given to Abraham. Jesus the Anointed Messiah, Son of God, and presence of God himself came to make those who believe in him righteous, a righteousness that finds its source in God (3:23-25). Herein lies an important distinction to make: righteousness has always been sourced in God himself, from Abraham, to the people of Israel, to the NT believer. It has always been reckoned based on an individuals faith in the Righteous God and declared in conjunction with his continued presence in the life of those who believe. Man in and of himself is never righteous but it is through faith that he can partake in the Gods righteousness, a righteousness that enables man to be in the presence of God. This is the same righteousness from God through faith in Jesus Christ that erases the distinction between Jew and Gentile (3:28). The common faith of both of these ethnic groups makes them both sons of Abraham and heirs to the promised blessing of

191 The contrast here is one of dispensations or epochs of redemptive-history, that of (law) and that of (faith). Michael Bird, The Saving Righteousness of God: Studies on Paul, Justification and the New Perspective (Paternoster Biblical Monographs) (Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2008), 137. 192 Dunn sees this role as essentially positive -- to instruct in good manners, to correct as appropriate, to protect as necessary. In Galatians 3, then, Israel is likened to a child growing up in an evil world (cf. 1.4), needing protection from evil and discipline to bring it safe to the maturity of adulthood. And that protective, disciplining role was the role of the law, likened to a []. James D. G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul the Apostle (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2006), 142.

91

God's continued presence, a presence now defined by the Spirit of God as he manifest his power among his people. Fees description holds true for both the Old and New Testament people of God: They are not saved by doing righteousness -- that is unthinkable, since righteousness as a behavior is the product of the Spirits empowering, not a requirement of obedience in order to get in.193 This theme of the presence of God among his people (the church consisting of both Jew and Gentile) is extended throughout the rest of the letter to the Galatians. While space does not permit a full exposition of these passages, I will briefly note a few that should be considered in light of the above discussion. In 4:1-31, Paul continues to discuss the believer's sonship using the image of slavery that is associated with the present evil/cursed age. He continues to allude back to his gospel summary (1:3-10) as he works towards the concept of freedom associated with Christ's death on the cross. In 5:1-6 Paul speaks to the issue of circumcision, explaining that those trying to be made righteous are actually severing themselves from Christ and submitting once again to the yoke of slavery that defines the present evil age. He is explicitly clear that those eagerly await the hope of righteousness in the presence of the Spirit (as opposed to those who are severed from Christ due to their reliance on the Law and residence in the past age). In 5:13-15 Paul explains the effect this freedom has on relationships within the church. It is interesting that he chooses to affirm the Law as he quotes Lev. 19:18. In the same manner the OT Israelites fulfilled the Law in relationship with each other, Paul urges his audience to serve one another through love, For the entire Law is fulfilled in one word: You will love your neighbor as yourself. In 5:16-26, Paul continues to contrast the two ages by discussing life in the Spirit as opposed to the works of the flesh ( ). It is important to note here that walking by the Spirit is not contrasted with the Law itself but with the works of the flesh. These works of the flesh are the equivalent to the works of the law
193 Gordon D. Fee, Paul, the Spirit, and the People of God (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Pub, 1996), 105. Also see Fees interesting discussion on the experience of the promised eschatological Spirit of God being the core of Pauls argument in Galatians (not justification by faith) Ibid., 100-103.

92

mentioned previously and are placed (Pauls further designation of the present evil age). In 6:2 Paul refers back to the summary of the entire Law which he gave in 5:14 calling it the . In doing this he gives credence to the OT Law in its fulfilled state. Jesus the Jewish Messiah, born under the Law, gave himself on our behalf inorder to free us from this present evil age. His loving and selfless act fulfilled the Law, making it now the Law of Christ. Conclusion God revealed his Son, Jesus Christ, to Paul for the purpose of truly continuing (as opposed to what Paul believed he was accomplishing through his zeal for the traditions of his fathers) his self-revelatory program among the Gentiles within the new eschatological age that had been initiated by Jesus' presence among the Jewish people. The Spirit of God was made manifest in and among the Gentile believers of the Galatian church, revealing God's will and signifying their righteousness in the presence of God himself. Rather than listening to the circumcision party, who desired to lead them astray from the truth of the gospel (just as Peter's actions at Antioch accomplished with his fellow Jews and Gentiles) the Galatian believers needed to recognize the presence of God among them as a sign of the new eschatological age within which they existed, . This age was foretold in the promise of Gen. 12 when Jew and Gentile alike would experience the blessing of the presence of God (Gen. 12:3). The Gentiles themselves would serve as witnesses that the new age had come, not only to other Gentiles they encounter but, to the progeny of Abraham (both to those who had not yet believed and to those who had already put their faith in Christ). I believe it is this OT understanding of God's presence, in the person of the Spirit of God, that undergirds Paul's explanation of the function of the Law in his letter to the Galatians. It is important to recognize the difference between the OT Law and the works of the law in Second
93

Temple Judaism. The OT Law was directly given by God through a revelatory encounter with his manifest presence. The works of the law were heavily influenced by the traditional halakhah, altering the OT Law's primary theocentric function and giving it an exclusive ethnocentric focus. Paul's revelatory encounter with the risen Jesus, the Son of God and divine presence, reformed his ethnocentric Second Temple Jewish (Pharisaical) perspective concerning the Law to the original Israelite perspective of the Law as revelatory of God's nature and character. At this encounter, Paul experienced a graceful calling in conjunction with the understanding that a new eschatological age had been initiated by the presence of the Jewish Messiah among his people. This presence was continued in the person of the Spirit of God who confirmed the new age by indwelling believers and working his power among, not only the progeny of Abraham, but also Gentiles! The question of righteousness, which was always associated with the presence of God, was no longer to be considered limited to the faithful ethnic Jew instead, righteousness was to continue to be associated with the presence of God, a concept that serves to create explicit continuity between the Old and New Testaments.

94

Bibliography Alden, Robert. .In Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, Electronic Ed., ed. R. Laird Harris, Jr. Archer, Gleason L., and Bruce K. Waltke, 41. Chicago: Moody Press, 1999. Arndt, William, Frederick W. Danker, and Walter Bauer. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3 ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000. Barker, P.A. Rest, Peace. In Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch (the Ivp Bible Dictionary Series), ed. T. Desmond Alexander, and David W. Baker, 687-691. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2002. ________. Sabbath. In Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch, ed. T. Desmond Alexander, and David W. Baker, 698. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2002. Beker, Johan C. Paul the Apostle. Philadelphia: Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 2000. Berlejung, A. Washing the Mouth: The Consecration of Divine Images in Mesopotamia. In The Image and the Book: Iconic Cults, Aniconism, and the Rise of Book Religion in Israel and the Ancient Near East, ed. K. Van der Toorn, 72. Peeters: Leuven, 1997. Betz, Hans Dieter. Galatians Hermeneia. Hermeneia: A Critical & Historical Commentary on the Bible, Philadelphia: Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 1989. Bird, Michael. The Saving Righteousness of God: Studies on Paul, Justification and the New Perspective (Paternoster Biblical Monographs). Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2008. ________. Justification as Forensic Declaration and Covenant Membership: A Via Media Between Reformed and Revisionist Readings of Paul. Tyndale Bulletin 57, no. 1 (2006): 109 - 130. ________. Introducing Paul: The Man, His Mission and His Message. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2009. Block, Daniel I. The Grace of Torah: The Mosaic Prescription for Life (Deut. 4: 18; 6: 20 25). Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 162, (2005): 3-22. ________. How I Love Your Torah, O Lord!: Studies in the Book of Deuteronomy. Eugene, Or: Cascade Books, 2011. Bruce, F. F. The Epistle to the Galatians. New International Greek Testament Commentary, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1982. Childs, Brevard S. Book of Exodus (Old Testament Library). Louisville, KY: Westminster Press, 2004. Ciampa, Roy E. The Presence and Function of Scripture in Galatians 1 and 2 (Wissenshftliche Untersuchungen Zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe, No 102). Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998. Cornelius, I. .In New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, ed. General Editor Willem A. VanGemeren, 4, 312-313. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1997. Davies, W. D. Paul and Rabbinic Judaism: Some Rabbinic Elements in Pauline Theology. Sigler Pr, 1980. Dunn, James. The Epistle to the Galatians. Blacks New Testament Commentary, Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1993.
95

Dunn, James D. G. The Theology of Paul the Apostle. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2006. Durham, John I. Shalom and the Presence of God. In Proclamation and Presence : Old Testament Essays in Honour of Gwynne Henton Davies, ed. John I. Durham, and J. R. Porter, 272-293. Richmond : John Knox Press, 1970. Eisenbaum, Pamela. Paul Was Not a Christian: The Original Message of a Misunderstood Apostle. 1 ed. New York: HarperOne, 2009. Fee, Gordon D. Paul, the Spirit, and the People of God. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Pub, 1996. Fredriksen, Paula. Judaizing the Nations: The Ritual Demands of Pauls Gospel. New Testament Studies 56, no. 2 (2010): 232 - 252. Freedman, David Noel. Name of the God of Moses. Journal of Biblical Literature 79, no. 2 (1960): 151 - 156. Foster, Benjamin R. Transmission of Knowledge. In A Companion to the Ancient Near East (Blackwell Companions to the Ancient World), ed. Daniel C. Snell, 245-252. WileyBlackwell, 2005. Hamilton, Victor P. The Book of Genesis, 1-17. Vol. 1. New International Commentary on the Old Testament Series, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1990. ________. Exodus: An Exegetical Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2011. Hanson, K. C. Palestine in the Time of Jesus: Social Structures and Social Conflicts. 2 ed. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2008. Heath, E.A. Grace. In Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch, ed. T. Desmond Alexander, and David W. Baker, 372. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2002. Hess, R. He Swore an Oath: Biblical Themes From Genesis 12-50. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1994. King, Philip J. 2006. "Circumcision: Who Did It, Who Didnt and Why." Biblical Archaeology Review 32, no. 4: 48-55. Kittel, Gerhard. . In Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel, and Geoffrey W. Friedrich Bromiley, Gerhard, Grand Rapids, MI:: Eerdmans, 1964. Koopmans, William T. .In New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis, ed. General Editor Willem A. VanGemeren, 2, 809. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1997. Longenecker, Richard N. Galatians. Vol. 41. Word Biblical Commentary, Dallas, TX: Thomas Nelson, 1990. Martens, Elmer A. Intertext Messaging: Echoes of the Aaronic Blessing (Numbers 6:24-26). Direction 38, no. 2 (2009): 163 - 178. Martin, Ralph P., and Julie L. Wu. Galatians. Vol. 3. Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary: Romans to Philemon, ed. Clinton E. Arnold. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2002. Martyn, J. Louis. Galatians. The Anchor Yale Bible Commentaries, New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004. Mathews, Kenneth. Genesis 11:27-50:26. Vol. 1B. The New American Commentary, Nashville, TN: Holman Reference, 2005.

96

McKeown, J. Blessings and Curses. In Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch (the Ivp Bible Dictionary Series), ed. T. Desmond Alexander, and David W. Baker, 83-87. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2002. Milgrom, J. The Desecration of Yhwhs Name: Its Parameters and Significance. Birkat Shalom: Studies in the Bible, Ancient Near Eastern Literature, and Postbiblical Judaism Presented to Shalom M. Paul on the Occasion of his Seventieth Birthday 69-81. Miller, Patrick D. Blessing of God : An Interpretation of Numbers 6:22-27. Interpretation 29, no. 3 (1975): 240 - 251. Nanos, Mark. The Myth of the Law Free Paul Standing Between Christians and Jews. Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations 4, (2009): ________. Locating Paul on a Map of First-Century Judaism. SBL Annual Meeting (2010): 122-132. Niehaus, Jeffrey. In the Wind of the Storm : Another Look At Genesis Iii 8. Vetus testamentum 44, no. 2 (1994): 263 - 267. Ross, Allen P. Creation and Blessing: A Guide to the Study and Exposition of Genesis. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1997. ________. Genesis, Exodus. Cornerstone Biblical Commentary, Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Pub., 2008. Sailhammer, John H., Walter C. Kaiser Jr, and Richard Hess. Genesis-Leviticus. Revised ed. The Expositors Bible Commentary: Zondervan, 2008. Sanders, E. P. Paul, the Law, and the Jewish People. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 1983. ________. Judaism: Practice and Belief, 63 Bce-66 Ce. Trinity Pr Intl, 1992. Sasson, Jack M. 1966. "Circumcision in the ancient Near East." Journal of Biblical Literature 85, no. 4: 473-476. Schreiner, Thomas R. Galatians. Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, Zondervan, 2010. Selman, M.J. Law. In Dictionary of the Old Testament: Pentateuch, ed. T. Desmond Alexander, and David W. Baker, 497-515. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2002. Speiser, E. A. Genesis. 2nd Edition ed. The Anchor Yale Bible Commentaries, Yale University Press, 1963. Steiner, Richard C. 1999. "Incomplete Circumcision in Egypt and Edom: Jeremiah (9:24-25) in the Light of Josephus and.." Journal of Biblical Literature 118, no. 3: 497. Stuart, Douglas K. Exodus (the New American Commentary). Vol. 2. Nashville, TN: Holman Reference, 2006. Swanson, James. Dictionary of Biblical Languages With Semantic Domains : Hebrew (Old Testament). electronic ed. ed. Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997. Turner, G.A. Sign. In The Zondervan Encyclopedia of the Bible, ed. Merrill C. Tenney, and Moises Silva, 507-510. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009. Twelftree. Signs and Wonders. In New Dictionary of Biblical Theology: Exploring the Unity & Diversity of Scripture, ed. Brian S. Rosner, T. Desmond Alexander, Graeme Goldsworthy, and D. A. Carson, 775-781. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2000.

97

Von Rad, Gerhard. Genesis - a Commentary (Old Testament Library). Revised ed. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1973. Walton, John H. Covenant: Gods Purpose, Gods Plan. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994. ________. Genesis. The Niv Application Commentary, Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2001. Way, Kenneth. Hello My Name is Yahweh. Good Book Blog (2011): http:// thegoodbookblog.com/2011/mar/08/hello-my-name-is-yhwh/ Weinfeld, M. The Covenant of Grant in the Old Testament and in the Ancient Near East. Journal of the American Oriental Society 90, no. 2 (1970): 184-203. Wells, Bruce. Exodus. In Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, ed. John H. Walton, 160-283. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011. Wenham, Gordon J. Genesis 1-15. Vol. 1. Word Biblical Commentary, Dallas, TX: Thomas Nelson, 1987. Westerholm, Stephen. Paul and the Law in Romans 9-11. In Paul and the Mosaic Law, ed. James D. G. Dunn, 215-249. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000. ________. Perspectives Old and New on Paul: The Lutheran Paul and His Critics. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003. ________. Sinai as Viewed From Damascus : Pauls Reevaluation of the Mosaic Law. In Road From Damascus, 147-165. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1997. Westermann, Claus. Genesis 12-36. Continental Commentaries, Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 1995. ________. Genesis. Translated by David E. Green. New York: T&T Clark Intl, 2004. Witherington III, Ben. Grace in Galatia: A Commentary on Pauls Letter to the Galatians. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998. Wright, Christopher J. H. Ten Commandments. In The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: Q-Z, ed. Geoffrey W. Bromiley, 4, 1230. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1995. Wyatt, Nick. 2009. "Circumcision and Circumstance: Male Genital Mutilation in Ancient Israel and Ugarit." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 33, no. 4: 405-431.

98