The Faithfulness of Jesus Christ as a Theme in Paul’s Theology in Galatians in

The Faith of Jesus Christ: Exegetical, Biblical, and Theological Studies Edited by Michael F. Bird & Preston M. Sprinkle

Milton Keynes, UK: Paternoster; Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2009

A. B. Caneday Professor of New Testament Studies & Biblical Theology

Northwestern College Saint Paul, Minnesota USA

Pistis Christou Discussion Panel

Moderator Preston M. Sprinkle

Presenters

Ardel B. Caneday Mark A. Seifrid

Bruce Lowe

Respondents Scott Hafemann Gerald Peterman Timothy Gombis

Hilton Hotel Room 305

2:50-6:00 PM November 17, 2010

2

In Galatians 3:23 Paul makes a statement that is rather startling to post-Reformation ears but probably also to first century Christian ears as well. He states, “Before the πίστις came we were held in custody under the law, being incarcerated for the πίστις that was about to be revealed.” Paul’s statement startles because ἡ πίστις bears an unexpected function. Paul makes it serve first as the subject of the verb ἔρχομαι and then as the object of the verb ἀποκαλύπτω. Paul states that ἡ πίστις “came” and ἡ πίσις “was revealed.” It is noteworthy that the only other time that Paul uses ἀποκαλύπτω in his letter to the Galatians is in 1:16 with God’s Son as the object revealed in the apostle (ἀποκαλύψαι τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ ἐν ἐμοί). In 3:25 Paul reiterates 3:23, “Now that ἡ πίστις has come we are no longer under the pedagogue.” This ἡ πίστις was not present until it “came” when this ἡ πίστις was eschatologically “revealed.” What is this ἡ πίστις?

Of the eight uses of ἔρχομαι in Galatians, the latter four occur throughout the core of

Paul’s argument as he progresses from his introduction of τὸ σπέρμα to whom, in conjunction with Abraham the promises were spoken, onto his climaxing assertion, “Now if you belong to Christ, then you are τὸ σπέρμα of Abraham, heirs in keeping with the promise” (3:29). So, Paul’s four uses of ἔρχομαι all refer to the Seed’s eschatological entrance, that delivers from the law’s jurisdiction, which he variously designates: (1) until τὸ σπέρμα should come to whom the promise was made (3:19), (2) before ἡ πίστις came (3:23), (3) now that ἡ πίστις has come (3:25), and (4) when τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου came (4:4-5).

Table 1

Gal. Four Uses of Ἔρχομαι Signal An Eschatological Arrival

3:19 Τί οὖν ὁ νόμος; τῶν παραβάσεων χάριν προσετεθη, ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελαι.

3:23 Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν ὑπὸ νόμον ἐφρουρούμεθα συγκλειόμενοι εἰς τὴν μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι

3:25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως οὐκέτι ὑπὸ παιδαγωγόν ἐσμεν.

4:4-5 ὅτε δὲ ἦλθεν τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ χρόνου, ἐξαπέστειλεν ὁ θεὸς τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ, γενόμενον ἐκ γυκαικός, γενόμενον ὑπὸ νόμον, ἵνα τοὺς ὑπὸ νόμον ἐξαγοράσῃ, ἵνα τὴν υἱοθεσίαν ἀπολάβωμεν.

Paul’s four uses of ἔρχομαι within the temporal and purpose clauses of 3:19, 23, 25, and 4:4-5 all signal the eschatological arrival that puts an end to the law’s jurisdiction. All four of these uses of ἔρχομαι correlate with four other purpose and temporal clauses that further elaborate upon this eschatological arrival that ends the law’s jurisdiction. These occur in 3:22, 23, 24, and 4:2.

Table 2

Gal. Greek Purpose & Temporal Clauses

3:22 ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ

3:23 εἰς τὴν μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι

3:24 εἰς Χριστόν

4:2 ἄχρι τῆς προθεσμίας τοῦ πατρός

3

Crucial to Paul’s argument are the words “the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his Seed . . . who is Christ” (3:16) and his repetition of this in 3:19. Messiah is Abraham’s singular Seed to whom the promises were spoken. Paul, in other words, reasons that Messiah was present when the promises were spoken.1 For this reason Paul writes “in order that the promise ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ might be given to those who believe” (3:22).2 For different reasons, exegetes who take competing interpretations prefer to take ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ as qualifying δοθῇ rather than ἡ ἐπαγγελία which it follows, transposing Paul word order.3 The word order, however, is in keeping with the idiom of origin that Paul sustains throughout his argument, beginning in 2:12.4

As such, ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ qualifies ἡ ἐπαγγελία.

As one traces Paul’s argument in 3:15-4:7, he expressly identifies τὸ σπέρμα as the Christ (ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός; 3:16, 19) and that precisely where readers might have expected him to write either τὸ σπέρμα or ὁ Χριστός again, instead he writes ἡ πίστις three times in 3:23 and 25 as an interchangeable figurative designation for ὁ Χριστός (3:24). All three expressions are interchangeable designations for the eschatological arrival of the objectified promise made to Abraham that marks the end of the law’s oppressive covenant dominion. Thus, Paul construes the eschatological coming and revelation of Christ, also designated as τὸ σπέρμα and as ἡ πίστις, as divine deliverance from the law which has a restricted span of jurisdiction and has a divinely ordained purpose in relation to the promise God made to Abraham and to his τὸ σπέρμα. Paul portrays the law’s ordained jurisdiction with various imageries that accent the law’s confining but temporary jurisdiction. “Scripture incarcerated everything under sin” (3:22). “We were held in custody under the law, being incarcerated” (3:23). “The law became our pedagogue” (3:24). “We are no longer under the pedagogue” (3:25). “I say, as long as the heir is a child he does not differ from a slave . . . he is under guardians and household managers” (4:1-2).

Thus, Paul’s argument throughout 3:15-4:7 juxtaposes ἡ πίστις over against ὁ νόμος,

not as two contrasting human actions, believing versus doing, but as markers of two distinct epochs, the epoch under the jurisdiction of the law of Moses now consummated by the arrival of the eschatological date set by the Father (4:2) with the advent of the Christ (3:24) who is τὸ σπέρμα, to whom the promises were spoken (3:16, 19), who is the eschatological ἡ πίστις. So, Paul insists that ὁ νόμος and ἡ πίστις correlate as redemptive-historical epochs that come after

1 Cf. the claim that Levi gave tithes to Melchizedek in Heb. 7:9. That Messiah was present to receive the spoken promise is no more remarkable than Paul’s earlier claim, “And Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles ἐκ πίστεως, proclaimed the gospel in advance to Abraham: ‘in you all the Gentiles will be blessed’” (3:8).

2 Torah does not originate ἐκ πίστεως [Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ] (3:12); the promise originates ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (3:22).

3 On competing interpretations see Fung, Galatians, 165; Hays, The Faith of Jesus Christ (1983), 157ff and (2002), 143ff; and Hooker, “Πίστις Χριστοῦ,” NTS, 329. Contrast Matlock, “The Rhetoric of πίστις in Paul: Galatians 2.16, 3.22, and Philippians 3.9,” JSNT 30 (2007): 187-190.

4 I demonstrate that Paul introduces the idiom of origin or pedigree with οἱ ἐκ περιτομπης (2:12) followed by ἐξ ἐθνπων ἁμαρτωλοί (2:15), and ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ἔργων νόμου (2:16). The idiom does not refer to “works-righteousness.” Paul sustains this idiom throughout his argument later when he substitutes ὅσοι for ἄνθρωπος when he writes “as many as are from the deeds required by the law” (ὅσοι ἐξ ἔργων νόμου, 3:10). Consequently, just as ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ἔργων νόμου and ὅσοι ἐξ ἔργων νόμου designate Jews whose spiritual pedigree or origin is from the law, so also οἱ ἐκ πίστεως [Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ] designates those whose spiritual pedigree or origin is from Christ (see “The Faithfulness of Jesus Christ as a Theme in Paul’s Theology in Galatians,” in The Faith of Jesus Christ,194ff).

4

the promise covenant with Abraham, with ἡ πίστις fulfilling and ending ὁ νόμος. This confirms that he regards ἡ πίστις as an objectified figurative replacement for τὸ σπέρμα and ὁ Χριστός. What warrants Paul’s objectifying or incarnating ἡ πίστις this way?

All of Paul’s uses of ἡ πίστις in 3:23-26 refer back to his formulaic expression ἐκ

πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ in 3:22 which first occurs in 2:16 with variations (διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ, ἐκ πίστεως Χριστοῦ), again in 2:20 (ἐν πίστει τῇ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ), and in shortened forms in 3:2 and 5 (ἐξ ἀκοῆς πίστεως) and 3:7, 9, 11, and 12 (ἐκ πίστεως). Now, as Paul’s argument escalates toward the penultimate summary before reaching the zenith, in 3:22 he returns to the compact, full, and redundant expression, πίστις Χριστοῦ, which he introduces in 2:16, except here, the progression of his argument moves to disambiguate and to clarify the sense of πίστις Χριστοῦ with vigor, with his objectified use of ἡ πίστις.

Table 35

Gal.

The Eschatological Arrival of Ἡ Πίστις

3:22 ἵνα ἡ ἐπαγγελία ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοθῇ τοῖς πιστεύουσιν

3:23a Πρὸ τοῦ δὲ ἐλθεῖν τὴν πίστιν

3:23b εἰς τὴν μέλλουσαν πίστιν ἀποκαλυφθῆναι

3:24 ἵνα ἐκ πίστεως δικαιωθῶμεν

3:25 ἐλθούσης δὲ τῆς πίστεως

3:26 διὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ

Whatever may be the meaning of ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ in 3:22, Paul sustains it

throughout the next four verses by anaphoric use of πίστις five times and the anaphoric article with πίστις four of these times (see above chart). Within this repetitious series, as he does earlier in the letter, once again Paul abridges the formulaic expression of 3:22 by writing ἵνα ἐκ πίστεως δικαιθῶμεν (3:24), a condensed restatement of 2:16 where he includes the genitive Χριστοῦ. This surely confirms that whatever Paul means by his formulaic expression, ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, in 3:22 he also means by the varied expressions in 2:16 (διὰ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ; ἐκ πίστεως Χριστοῦ). In 3:24, Paul need not include the genitive Χριστοῦ, as in 2:16 and in 3:22, for by now readers know that the genitive is implicitly present as a qualifier, even if not expressly stated, for his argument throughout features ὁ Χριστός, regardless however the genitive correlates with πίστις, whether (1) the object of πίστις, (2) the actor who exercises πίστις, or (3) the one who possesses πίστις.

Concerning the three uses of ἡ πίστις in 3:23 and 25, virtually every exegete rejects

the notion that Paul refers to the subjective act of faith and acknowledges that Paul assigns

5 Bold features the six mentions of πίστις. Bold italic highlights the anaphoric article. Underlining accents

the verbs that objectify πίστις.

5

objectivity to ἡ πίστις.6 Hans Dieter Betz surely is correct when he says that ἡ πίστις “describes the occurrence of a historical phenomenon, not the act of believing of an individual.”7 Likewise, Moisés Silva rightly observes, “The use of the verb ἐλθεῖν . . . suggests strongly that Paul must be referring to Christ, an identification that is confirmed by the immediate context.”8 Correct as this claim is, Silva’s attempt to explain that Paul uses ἡ πίστις “as a simple metonymy whereby” the act of faith in Christ “stands for the object of faith” seems unnatural, if not imposed.9

One difficulty is that whenever Paul seems to use ἡ πίστις as a simple metonymy for faith’s object, the reference does not seem to be Christ per se but more generally the gospel or the body of things believed, which is why several exegetes understand ἡ πίστις as “the gospel,” based on earlier use of ἡ πίστις in Galatians 1:23 (cf. e.g., 2 Cor. 13:5; 1 Tim. 4:6; 6:10, 21; Titus 1:13). If, as Silva contends, ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (3:22) means “by faith in Jesus Christ,” it seems counterintuitive to objectify ἡ πίστις, the human act of faith, and substitute it twice in 3:23 and again in 3:25 by way of metonymy for the object of faith, ὁ Χριστός which has now arrived and is now revealed. Why would Paul feature the subjective act of faith and claim that it has now come and that it is now revealed but expect that readers to understand that he actually refers to Christ, not human faith in Christ? This seems tortuous and unnatural.

Douglas Campbell also understands ἡ πίστις in 3:23 as metonymy, but the figure of speech substitutes “the faithful one,” for Christ, the person.10

To take ἡ πίστις this way also seems unnatural, even contrived, and therefore unconvincing, because if Paul meant this, he could have written ὁ πιστός, which, in 3:9 he does, referring to Abraham as ὁ πιστός.

The context seems to make it apparent that ἡ πίστις does have a metonymical function. Yet, what does ἡ πίστις figuratively replace? Silva seems right to claim that “Paul must be referring to Christ,” but how does this metonymy refer to Christ? Does Paul’s metonymy play off Christ as (1) the object of πίστις, (2) the one who acts with πίστις, (3) the source of πίστις, (4) the one who possesses πίστις, or (5) some other relationship between Χριστός and πίστις?

Seifrid’s understanding blends two senses, taking ἡ πίστις as a metonymy for Christ

and his work as inseparable with an additional sense: “only now has Christ been given as the

6 See, e. g., Ronald K. Fung, The Epistle to the Galatians, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 168;

and Ernest DeWitt Burton, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians, ICC (New York: Scriber’s Sons, 1920): 198. Even Bultmann says, “Though Gal 3:23-26 sketches the preparation and the ‘coming’ of ‘faith,’ what is sketched is not the individual’s development but the history of salvation” (Theology of the New Testament, trans. Kendrick Grobel [New York: Scribners, 1951], 1.319). Some take ἡ πίστις as “the Christian revelation” (Brown, Galatians, 171). Some understand it as “Christianity” (Hans Lietzmann states, “Objectiv πίστις = ‘Christentum,’ Lehre von der Heilsbedutung der subjektiven πίστις” [An die Galater, HNT 10 {Tübingen: Mohr, Siebeck, 1932}, 23]. Cf. Wilhelm Mundle, Der Glaubensbegriff bei Paulus [Leipzig: Heisius, 1932], 93). Others take it as “the gospel” (cf. BDAG, 820).

7 Hans Dieter Betz, Galatians, (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979), 176, n.120. 8 Moisés Silva, “Faith Versus Works of Law in Galatians,” Justification and Variegated Nomism, vol 2,

The Paradoxes of Paul, ed. D. A. Carson, Peter T. O’Brien, and Mark A. Seifrid (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck; Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004), 240.

9 Ibid. 10 Campbell translates ἡ πίστις (3:23a, 23b, 25, 26) as “the faithful one” (The Quest for Paul's Gospel. A

Suggested Strategy [London: T&T Clark International, 2005], 212).

6

source and object of faith.”11

Theologically speaking, attractive as this may be with some modifications, it does not seem to provide sufficient explanatory power exegetically for the full span of Paul’s argument in Galatians 2:15-4:31.

Against the inadequate notion that Christ is the exemplar of faith, my understanding has always affirmed the imperative of faith in Christ precisely because he is now revealed as the worthy eschatological object of our faith (cf. Gal. 2:16, ἡμεῖς εἰς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦ ἐπιστεύσαμεν). For lack of a better exegetical category, I have inclined toward taking πίστις Χριστοῦ as a possessive genitive, Christ’s faithfulness. Many exegetical and logical progressions in Paul’s argument have led me to believe for a long time that πίστις Χριστοῦ in Galatians is a metonymy for God’s eschatological act of redemption from the curse of the law through Christ’s faithfulness (a possessive genitive?), which correlates with and answers Israel’s unfaithfulness that incurred the law’s curse. This, of course, has reference to Christ’s substitutionary role of redeeming us from Torah’s curse when he put an end to Torah’s impedimentary function of confining its subjects typologically representative of the whole world’s imprisonment under sin (cf. Rom. 3:19-20). Among several exegetical reasons that lead to this conclusion, five follow.

First, from the beginning of his argument Paul contrasts two distinguishable

covenants, the law covenant is provisional until the Christ covenant arrives to fulfill and to displace it. Two distinct spiritual lineages emerge from these two covenants. One who traces spiritual lineage from the law (ἐξ ἔργων νόμου; 2:16, etc.) is not justified before God because the law does not bless but brings a curse (3:10, 13) and because righteousness does not come from the law (3:21). So, Paul accents origins as he reasons, “We Jews by nature and not sinners from the Gentiles know that a man from the deeds required by the law is not justified except through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ, and we believed in Christ Jesus in order that we might be justified from the faithfulness of Christ and not from the deeds required by the law, because from the deeds required by the law all flesh will not be justified” (2:15-16). Thus, Paul sustains his argument throughout 2:15-3:29 with idiomatic expressions that build off his expressions, οὐ δικαιοῦται ἄνθρωπος ἐξ ἔργων νόμου and δικαιωθῶμεν ἐκ πίσεως Χριστοῦ (2:16 et al.).

Second, even if one takes πίστις Χριστοῦ as an objective genitive, simply a variation

of ἡμεῖς εἰς Χριστὸν Ἰησοῦ ἐπιστεύσαμεν (2:16), it is difficult to insist that Paul’s argument features faith over Christ. It seems that the point of his antipodal arrangement of ἐξ ἔργων νόμου and ἐκ πίστεως Χριστοῦ does not focus upon doing versus believing but upon the law covenant that requires deeds versus Christ whose eschatological arrival ends the law’s jurisdiction.12

Third, the many temporal and purpose clauses in 3:15-4:7 all feature Christ and his eschatological redeeming work as the climax and termination of the law’s confining and oppressive temporary jurisdiction. These temporal and purpose clauses interchange various eschatological descriptions including τὸ σπέρμα, ὁ Χριστός, and ἡ πίστις.

11 Mark Seifrid, “Paul, Luther, and Justification in Gal. 2:15-21,” WTJ 65 (2003): 219. Cf. idem, “The Faith

of Christ,” in The Faith of Jesus Christ, eds. Michael F. Bird & Preston M. Sprinkle [Milton Keynes, UK: Paternoster; Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2009], 129-146.

12 Cf. T. David Gordon, who though he adopts the objective genitive view, contends that “If we would understand the polemic of Galatians, we must describe it in terms of ‘Torah or Christ’ rather than in terms of ‘Works or Faith’” (“The Problem at Galatia,” Int 41 [1987]: 36-38).

7

Fourth, as Paul advances his argument toward its apex he resumes his formulaic use

of ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ in 3:22. Answering his earlier statement that “the law is not ἐκ πίστεως [Χριστοῦ],” Paul’s word order in 3:22 suggests that we should translate the verse: “But Scripture incarcerated everything under sin, in order that the promise ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ might be given to everyone who believes.” This means that ἐκ πίστεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ modifies ἡ ἐπαγγελία not the verb δοθῇ. The promise is grounded in Messiah’s faithfulness, for the promise was spoken and made to Messiah, Abraham’s Seed (3:15, 19).13

Fifth, the three uses of ἡ πίστις in 3:23 and 25 with unmistakable unified reference to πίστις Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ in 3:22 provide a crux interpretum for understanding Paul’s use of πίστις Χριστοῦ in Galatians. Because ἡ πίστις is twice the subject of ἔρχομαι and once the object of ἀποκαλύπτω (cf. 1:16), Paul objectifies ἡ πίστις to designate the eschatological arrival and revelation of Abraham’s singular trustworthy Seed, Messiah, whose becoming a curse for us is the act of faithfulness that ends the law’s power to curse all who, because they are in Christ, are Abraham’s seed (3:22-29). Thus, as an objectified eschatological reference to τὸ σπέρμα, who is ὁ Χριστός, ἡ πίστις is a metonymy that features Christ’s faithfulness as God’s act of redemption in the Father’s appointed time (4:1), in the fullness of time (4:4). Of course, Christ’s trustworthiness warrants human trust in him (τοῖς πιστεύουσιν, 3:22).

Thus, Paul takes on the troublemakers’ unsettling argument that raises one principal

question. Who constitutes the Israel of God (Gal 6:16)? Or, who are the seed of Abraham (3:1-29)? Paul frames the question featuring two contrasting covenantal origins. Who makes up Abraham’s seed, those who are (1) ἐξ ἔργων νόμου, or (2) ἐκ πίστεως Χριστοῦ?

Paul addresses this question throughout 2:15-3:29 as he presses toward the apex of

his reasoning (3:27-29). “For, as many as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. Therefore, there is neither Jew nor Greek, nor is there slave or free, nor is there male and female, for we are all one in Christ Jesus. Now if you are of Christ, then you are of the seed of Abraham, heirs according to promise.” Here, Paul’s genitives (if you are of Christ then you are the seed of Abraham) depict the true eschatological lineage of Abraham. Paul’s reasoning inverts the troublemakers’ efforts to compel the Galatians to live as Jews that they might become Abraham’s seed. The seed who trace their lineage from Abraham through the law and circumcision hold no eschatological claim on God’s promises to Abraham. Instead, theirs is the curse of Torah. Through Christ alone, the eschatological blessing of Abraham comes, namely, the Spirit and justification.14

13 Gal. 3:16 states, “The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his Seed . . . who is the Christ” (τῷ

Ἀβραὰμ ἐρρέθησαν αἱ ἐπαγγελίαι καὶ τῷ σπἐρματι αὐτοῦ . . . ὅς ἐστιν Χριστός). Gal. 3:19 states, “. . . until the Seed to whom the promise had been made came” (ἄχρις οὗ ἔλθῃ τὸ σπέρμα ᾧ ἐπήγγελται ).

God’s promises belong to the seed who trace their eschatological lineage through Christ Jesus to Abraham. Being baptized into Christ, the singular Seed of Abraham, constitutes Jew and Greek together the seed of Abraham. Because Christ is the seed of Abraham to whom the promises were spoken (3:16, 19), all who are clothed with Christ are also

14 Cf. S. K. Williams, “Justification and the Spirit in Galatians,” JSNT 9 (1987): 91-100.

8

the seed of Abraham (3:29).15

Thus, Paul’s argument reaches its apex the way it begins in 2:15-16 by contrasting origin from Torah and origin from Christ.

In Galatians, Paul’s argument features Christ Jesus over against Torah, with Torah in a provisional servant role to Christ, as preparatory for Christ whose revealed coming ends the law’s temporary jurisdiction. Paul’s antithetical placement of ἡ πίστις Χριστοῦ with ἔργα νόμου/ὁ νόμος placards the faithfulness of Christ Jesus who accomplishes what the law could not. Torah requires deeds; Christ’s faithfulness elicits and warrants faith in him. Life is not within Torah’s power to give; life comes through death to Torah, which entails being crucified with Christ. Works required by the law condemn; Christ’s faithfulness justifies. Torah curses; Christ blesses. Torah discriminates Jews from Gentiles; Jesus Christ renders Gentiles and Jews one without distinction. Torah imprisoned unfaithful Israel under sin, representatively of the whole world; by his faithfulness, Christ gives freedom from Torah to Jew and Gentile alike. The law exacerbates transgressions; Christ gives life and righteousness. Torah impeded fulfillment of God’s promise to Abraham; Christ’s faithfulness, namely his bearing the curse “upon the tree,” removes the impediment by giving the promise to those who believe in him. The law prepared for Christ; Christ ends the law by subjecting himself to the law’s curse on our behalf. Torah foreshadows Messiah who was to come; Christ Jesus renders Torah passé as covenant, casting the law into the shadows, for it was appropriate only for the time before his advent but malapropos now that Abraham’s Seed has come.

15 That Paul deprecates one ritual (circumcision of the flesh) while he endorses another (baptism into

Christ) and that he appeals to the baptism of his readers in Galatia as virtually identifying them as belonging to Christ and consequently as Abraham’s seed suggests that his conflict with the Judaizers is not principally over ritualism or a form of works-righteousness. Paul’s concern is not principally ascribing efficaciousness to the act of circumcision to make one righteous. For, if it were, how could he escape the same charge with regard to baptism? Instead, given his argument, that he virtually merges the rite of baptism with being clothed with Christ suggests that Paul’s conflict with the agitators in Galatia converges upon their failure to acknowledge that the Mosaic law, which had a divinely given function until Christ Jesus had come, has been displaced by Messiah to whom it pointed (Gal 3:19-25). Now that Messiah has come, the law no longer has jurisdiction. Cf. A. B. Caneday, “The Curse of the Law and the Cross: Works of the Law and Faith in Galatians 3:1-14” (Ph.D. dissertation; Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 1992), 345-348.