She must and shall go free: Paul's Isaianic Gospel in Galatians

Matthew S. Harmon She Must and Shall Go Free Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die K...

Author: Matthew S. Harmon

87 downloads 1037 Views 2MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

Matthew S. Harmon She Must and Shall Go Free

Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche

Herausgegeben von

James D. G. Dunn · Carl R. Holladay Hermann Lichtenberger · Jens Schröter Gregory E. Sterling · Michael Wolter

Band 168

De Gruyter

Matthew S. Harmon

She Must and Shall Go Free Paul’s Isaianic Gospel in Galatians

De Gruyter

ISBN 978-3-11-022175-6 e-ISBN 978-3-11-022176-3 ISSN 0171-6441 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Harmon, Matthew S. She must and shall go free : Paul’s Isaianic Gospel in Galatians / Matthew S. Harmon. p. cm. - (Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche, ISSN 0171-6441 ; Bd. 168) Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and indexes. ISBN 978-3-11-022175-6 (hardcover 23 ¥ 15,5 : alk. paper) 1. Bible. N.T. Galatians - Relation to Isaiah. 2. Bible. O.T. Isaiah Relation to Galatians. I. Title. BS2685.52.H38 2010 2271.406-dc22 2010021330

Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de. ” 2010 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/New York Printing: Hubert & Co. GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ⬁ Printed on acid-free paper Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com

Acknowledgements Acknowledgements Acknowledgements Completing a dissertation elicits a strange mix of emotions, ranging from excitement and gratitude to fear and trembling. It marks the end of a remarkable season in life, one in which the kindness of God has been manifested to me in far too many ways to list here. Although their reward must await the final day, mentioning them here is a small way of acknowledging to others my dependence on the grace of God manifested through them. The place to begin is with those who enabled me to pursue doctoral studies. It is both humbling and sobering to reflect upon how generous and sacrificial others have been to enable me to pursue God’s call on my life. Both my own parents, Gary and Diane Harmon, and my wife’s parents, Tom and Jean Hudson, have been generous in their love and financial support throughout the process. My wife’s brother and his wife, John and Carolyn Hudson, have also been partners with us throughout the process, always quick to encourage as well as give. Other dear friends who have provided support and encouragement include: Gary and Carol Almy (and the Bible study that meets in their home), Steve and Patti Feldstein, Mike and Jenny Salvati, Paul and Laurie Alexander, Todd and Andrea Plotner, Steve and Diane Brewer, Jeff and Jen Brewer, David and Kate Sunday, and our friends at St. Paul United Methodist Church (Napoleon, OH) and Grace Community Bible Church (Roselle, IL). In addition to these dear friends, my studies at Wheaton would not have been possible without the Kenneth Kantzer Fellowship granted by Wheaton College and funded in large part by the class of 1953. God has been remarkably generous to me through these partners in the gospel. During both my Masters degree at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School and my doctoral studies at Wheaton College, several scholars have shaped me personally and academically. Their fingerprints are evident throughout my work, even where not explicitly acknowledged; the inadequacies remain my own. Dr. D. A. Carson introduced me to the broad field of Pauline studies and took time to shepherd me through my initial explorations into the complex issues surrounding Paul and the Law as well as the New Perspective. My two years as a graduate assistant for Dr. Doug Sweeney were invaluable in introduc-

vi

Acknowledgements

ing me to a model of rigorous scholarship combined with pastoral care for one’s students. Although not my mentor here at Wheaton, Dr. G. K. Beale took the time to discuss and read portions of my research and provide helpful feedback. His influence is obvious from a glance at the footnotes in this work. The two scholars charged with the thankless task of combing carefully through my dissertation and publicly examining me were my second reader Dr. Richard Schultz and my external reader Dr. Rikk Watts. Their probing and insightful questions resulted in a revised dissertation that is better than the defense draft. They went above and beyond the call of duty by not only requiring certain revisions but also making helpful suggestions for how the project might be improved should I seek to one day publish this project. Now that day has come, and this present version is significantly better. The remaining inadequacies should in no way be held against them. Special thanks must go to my mentor and now my friend, Dr. Doug Moo. His careful and rigorous scholarship first drew me to Trinity Evangelical Divinity School for my masters degree, and when he left to direct the PhD. program at Wheaton I knew I wanted to follow. During my three years at Wheaton Dr. Moo masterfully blended a demand for excellence in scholarship while motivating and encouraging by grace. I only wish my scholarship were a better reflection of his own abilities and energies that he has poured into me during my time at Wheaton. During the past several years I have had multiple opportunities to teach through Galatians in a variety of academic and church contexts. There is nothing like the probing questions of both students and lay people in the church to reveal places where my understanding of Galatians and Isaiah needed sharpening. I want to express special thanks to my Advanced Greek Exegesis students at Grace Theological Seminary. Walking them through Galatians verse-by-verse was pure joy and has resulted in an even deeper appreciation for the power of the gospel to transform lives. Now four years removed from the initial completion of the dissertation, it is also appropriate for me to express my thanks to De Gruyter for accepting this work into such a prestigious series. The process began with a providential encounter I had with Dr. Gregory Sterling, who is Professor of New Testament at the University of Notre Dame and one of the editors of Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche. Our mutual participation in a panel discussion sparked a discussion that led to him encouraging me to submit this dissertation to the fine folks at De Gruyter. I owe special thanks to Carsten Burfeind, Albrecht Doehnert and Sabina Da-

Acknowledgements

vii

browski for their assistance at various stages in preparing this manuscript. They have demonstrated both excellence and patience in guiding me through the entire process. This opportunity to publish my dissertation has allowed me to make what I believe to be some significant improvements. I have attempted to update some of the secondary literature to reflect works published after I initially defended and submitted the dissertation. But the most substantive revisions were in two primary areas. First, I have both expanded and tightened my discussion of methodology in an effort to remove some potential ambiguities and tensions pointed out by others. Second, I have significantly expanded the conclusion. The four years since originally writing my dissertation has allowed me to reflect further on the significance of Isaianic influence for our understanding of Galatians as well as larger issues within Paul’s theology and selfunderstanding. No acknowledgements section would be complete without recognizing the huge role that my two sons Jonathan and Jacob played in this entire process. When I began my Ph.D. program at Wheaton, Jonathan was five and Jacob was two. Seven years have passed since then, which means that I have been working on this project for the majority of their young lives. They have sacrificed far more than anyone else in bringing me to this point, and never once complained about the necessary long hours that often deprived them of my presence at home. Spending time with my sons often served as welcome break from the demands of scholarship and reminded me there were more important things in the world than the latest monograph on Galatians. It has been especially sweet to hear them pray for Daddy to “finish his book well” during our morning devotions. Last, but most certainly not least, I wish to thank my wife Kate. What words are adequate to express the debt I owe to my beloved bride? Next to my salvation, her companionship is the greatest gift God has given me, a gift we have now shared for fourteen years. She is a reflection to me and those around her of the self-sacrificial love of Christ, always willing to help others whenever possible. Not one time during the six years of graduate work did I ever hear her begrudge the long hours necessary for me to complete my studies. Her hunger for God’s word and love for others are an incarnation of Christ’s own devotion to the Father and willingness to pour oneself out in service to others for God’s glory and the advancement of his kingdom. There is no question that I have found an excellent wife (Proverbs 31:10). For all of these blessings and countless others unmentioned, I dedicate this dissertation to Christ, who loved me and gave himself for me.

viii

Acknowledgements

It is my prayer that he would use it in some small fashion to advance his kingdom. To him be the glory forever. Amen.

Table of Contents Table of Contents Acknowledgements ....................................................................................... v Chapter 1: Isaiah and Galatians: An Intertextual Matrix ...........................1 1.1 Introduction ...............................................................................................1 1.2 Review of Relevant Literature .................................................................3 1.2.1 Studies on Paul’s Use of the Old Testament .................................3 1.2.2 Studies on Paul’s Use of Isaiah ..................................................... 11 1.2.3 Studies on Galatians ...................................................................... 15 1.3 Paul’s Reading of Isaiah within Second Temple Judaism .................. 18 1.4 Paul’s Access to Isaiah’s Prophecies ...................................................... 21 1.4.1 Memorization ................................................................................. 21 1.4.2 Testimonia ...................................................................................... 23 1.4.3 Text .................................................................................................. 25 1.4.4 Conclusion ...................................................................................... 26 1.5 Methodology ............................................................................................ 26 1.5.1 The Methodology of this Study ................................................... 27 1.5.1.1 Terminology.......................................................................... 28 1.5.1.2 Criteria for Detecting Influence ......................................... 31 1.5.2 Reader Competence Past and Present ........................................ 34 1.5.3 Analyzing Paul’s Use of the Old Testament ............................... 36 1.6 The Structure of Isaiah 40–66 ................................................................. 40 1.6.1 The Structure of Isaiah 40–55 ....................................................... 41 1.6.2 The Structure of Isaiah 56–66 ....................................................... 44 1.6.3 Summary ........................................................................................ 45 1.7 Scope and Overview of this Project ...................................................... 45 Chapter 2: Singing the Servant’s Song in Galatians 1–2: Paul’s Apostolic Ministry Fulfills the Servant’s Mission in Isaiah 49 and 53 .................................................................................. 47 2.1 Overview of the Argument in Galatians 1–2 ....................................... 47 2.2 Instances of Isaianic Influence ............................................................... 48 2.2.1 Galatians 1:1-5 ................................................................................ 48 2.2.2 Galatians 1:6-10 .............................................................................. 66

x

Table of Contents

2.2.3 Galatians 1:11-24 ............................................................................ 75 2.2.4 Galatians 2:1-10 .............................................................................. 89 2.2.5 Galatians 2:11-21 ............................................................................ 91 2.2.6 Summary: Isaianic Influence in Galatians 1–2 ......................... 102 2.3 Synthesis ................................................................................................. 103 2.3.1 Paul as Servant of Yahweh in Isaiah 49 ..................................... 106 2.3.1.1 Romans 10:14-16................................................................. 106 2.3.1.2 Romans 15:21 ...................................................................... 108 2.3.1.3 2 Corinthians 6:2 ................................................................ 109 2.3.1.4 Ephesians 2:17 .................................................................... 110 2.3.1.5 Philippians 2:16 .................................................................. 110 2.3.1.6 Acts 13:47 ............................................................................ 111 2.3.1.7 Summary ............................................................................. 115 2.3.2 Jesus as the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 ............................... 115 2.3.3 “Christ Lives in Me”.................................................................... 117 2.4 Summary and Conclusions .................................................................. 121 Chapter 3: Reading the Servant’s Redemption in Galatians 3–4: Paul’s Interpretation of the Servant’s Salvation in Isaiah 51–54 ........................................................................................... 123 3.1 Overview of the Argument in Galatians 3–4 ..................................... 123 3.2 Instances of Isaianic Influence ............................................................. 125 3.2.1 Galatians 3:1-5 .............................................................................. 125 3.2.2 Galatians 3:6-29 ............................................................................ 133 3.2.3 Galatians 4:1-20 ............................................................................ 161 3.2.4 Galatians 4:21–5:1 ........................................................................ 173 3.2.5 Summary of Isaianic Influence in Galatians 3–4 ..................... 185 3.3 Synthesis ................................................................................................. 185 3.3.1 Galatians 3:1-5 – Introducing What Is at Stake ........................ 187 3.3.2 Galatians 3:6-14 – The Gospel Preached to Abraham ............. 188 3.3.3 Galatians 3:15-29 – The Servant/Seed Becomes a Curse to Bless the Gentiles ....................................................................... 191 3.3.4 Galatians 4:1-7 – The Servant/Seed & the New Exodus ......... 193 3.3.5 Galatians 4:8-20 – Paul’s Labor in the Gospel .......................... 196 3.3.6 Galatians 4:21–5:1 –Rejoice in the Freedom the Servant Bought ............................................................................... 197 3.3.7 Conclusion .................................................................................... 202 3.4 Summary and Conclusions .................................................................. 202

Table of Contents

xi

Chapter 4: Freeing the Servant’s Family in Galatians 5–6: Paul’s “Isaianic” Explanation of the Freedom of the Servant’s Family .................................................................................... 204 4.1 Overview of the Argument in Galatians 5–6 ..................................... 204 4.2 Instances of Isaianic Influence ............................................................. 205 4.2.1 Galatians 5:2-15 ............................................................................ 205 4.2.2 Galatians 5:16-26 .......................................................................... 210 4.2.3 Galatians 6:1-10 ............................................................................ 225 4.2.4 Galatians 6:11-18 .......................................................................... 228 4.2.5 Summary: Isaianic Influence in Galatians 5 – 6 ....................... 238 4.3 Synthesis ................................................................................................. 238 4.3.1 Freedom from the Powers of the Old Age ............................... 239 4.3.2 Experience of the Eschatological Spirit..................................... 243 4.3.3 Experience of New Creation ...................................................... 245 4.3.4 Experience of Eschatological Peace ........................................... 247 4.4 Summary and Conclusions .................................................................. 248 Chapter 5: Paul’s Isaianic Gospel in Galatians: A Synthesis and Conclusion ................................................................ 249 5.1 Summary of Isaianic Influence in Galatians ...................................... 249 5.1.1 An Isaianic Narrative Substructure in Galatians? ................... 250 5.1.1.1 Comparison of Paul’s Use of Isaiah 40–66 in Galatians with the Structure of Isaiah 40–66 ....................... 250 5.1.1.2 Comparison of Paul’s Use of Isaiah 40–66 in Galatians with Other Studies of Paul’s Use of Isaiah ......... 254 5.1.1.3 Conclusion .......................................................................... 257 5.2 Results and Implications ...................................................................... 258 5.2.1 The Value of Studying a Broader Spectrum of Paul’s Use of the Old Testament .............................................................. 258 5.2.2 The Structure of Galatians .......................................................... 261 5.2.3 The Isaianic Shape of Paul’s Self-Understanding and his Gospel Message ....................................................................... 261 5.3 Concluding Reflections ........................................................................ 264 5.4 Master Chart of Proposed Isaianic Influence .................................... 264 Bibliography................................................................................................. 267 Indices ........................................................................................................... 299 Modern Authors .......................................................................................... 299 Sources .......................................................................................................... 307

Chapter 1

Isaiah and Galatians: An Intertextual Matrix Isaiah and Galatians: An Intertextual Matrix

1.1 Introduction Introduction Few efforts to plant a church flourish without their moments of struggle, and Paul’s experiences in Galatia were no different. Some time after Paul had founded these largely Gentile communities in Asia Minor and left for further missionary endeavors, troublemakers (oi` tara,ssontej, Gal 1:7) stirred up controversy in these fledgling Christian communities. Questioning Paul’s apostolic credentials and teaching, they emphasized the importance of obeying the Mosaic Law. Alarmed at what was happening, Paul fired off a letter to rebut these charges and call the Galatian communities back to the gospel he preached. Foundational to his response was the testimony of the Old Testament, 1 which in his mind announced the gospel beforehand to Abraham (3:8), and validated his claim that Gentiles were heirs of the promise of Abraham on the same terms as Jews: faith in Jesus as the Messiah. Because of its foundational nature, the influence of the OT on Paul has been a prominent subject of investigation. As an extension of this broader examination of OT influence on Paul, recent studies have shifted from comprehensive studies to more focused investigations of individual letters, or even sections of a letter.2 One result has been to 1

2

Debate continues on the appropriate terminology when treating this subject. While it is true that the term “Old Testament” (abbreviated from this point forward) is anachronistic when applied to a figure such as Paul (he was simply reading scripture), it is retained here for the simple reason that all of the alternatives (Jewish Scriptures, Hebrew Bible, etc.) have their own shortcomings. Consequently, the terms OT and scripture will be used interchangeably in this study. See, e.g., the following: James W. Aageson, "Paul's Use of Scripture: A Comparative Study of Biblical Interpretation in Early Palestinian Judaism and the New Testament, with Special Reference to Romans 9–11" (Ph.D. diss., Oxford University, 1983); H. H. D. Williams, The Wisdom of the Wise: The Presence and Function of Scripture within 1 Cor. 1:18–3:23 (AGJU 49; Leiden: Brill, 2001); Brian S. Rosner, Paul, Scripture and Ethics: A Study of 1 Corinthians 5-7 (AGJU 22; Leiden: Brill, 1994); Linda L. Belleville, Reflections

2

Isaiah and Galatians: An Intertextual Matrix

confirm that the prophecies of Isaiah were particularly significant for Paul.3 This in turn has resulted in studies that have focused specifically on Paul’s use of Isaiah, with much of the attention devoted to Romans (particularly chapters 9–11).4 However, while Isaianic influence in Romans is well-documented, such is not the case in Galatians. Most scholars who investigate Paul’s use of the OT in Galatians focus on chapters 3–4, which in one respect is to be expected given the large number of explicit quotations and obvious allusions present in those chapters. 5 Such a focus, however, has resulted in a neglect of the significance of Scriptural, not to mention Isaianic, allusions and echoes in the remainder of the letter. As a result, to this point no studies have pursued the specific topic of Isaianic influence within the totality of Galatians. 6 This is an unfortunate oversight, since, as this study will show, no other OT book had more influence on Paul’s theological argumentation in Galatians than Isaiah. The extent of Isaianic influence within Galatians is such that it sheds light on important elements of the letter and shapes how one interprets the epistle.

3

4

5

6

of Glory: Paul's Polemical Use of the Moses-Doxa Tradition in 2 Corinthians 3.1-18 (JSNTSup 52; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991); and Thorsten Moritz, A Profound Mystery: The Use of the Old Testament in Ephesians (NovTSup 85; New York: Brill, 1996). According to one study, 25 of the 93 OT quotations come from Isaiah (27%), more than any other single book; see E. E. Ellis, Paul's Use of the Old Testament (Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1957), 150-52. For a similar tabulation, see Moises Silva, "Old Testament in Paul," in Dictionary of Paul and His Letters (ed. Gerald F. Hawthorne, Ralph P. Martin, and Daniel G. Reid; Downers Grove: IVP, 1993), 630-42. See, e.g., the following: Aageson, “Paul’s Use of Scripture”; Hans Hübner, Gottes Ich und Israel: Zum Schriftgebrauch des Paulus in Römer 9-11 (FRLANT 136; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1984); Douglas A. Oss, "Paul’s Use of Isaiah and Its Place in His Theology with Special Reference to Romans 9–11" (Ph.D. diss., Westminster Theological Seminary, 1992); Shiu-Lun Shum, Paul's Use of Isaiah in Romans: A Comparative Study of Paul's Letter to the Romans and the Sibylline and Qumran Sectarian Texts (WUNT 156; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002). In addition to the studies mentioned below, see, e.g., the following: George Howard, Paul: Crisis in Galatia: A Study in Early Christian Theology (2d ed.; SNTSMS 35; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990); G. W. Hansen, Abraham in Galatians: Epistolary and Rhetorical Contexts (JSNTSup 29; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1989); and Kjell A. Morland, The Rhetoric of Curse in Galatians: Paul Confronts Another Gospel (ESEC 5; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995). The famous citation of Isa. 54:1 in 4:27 has its own voluminous bibliography; for a representative sample, see below, 173 n. 156. This assessment is not meant to claim that no work has been done on specific Isaianic allusions and echoes. As we shall see throughout this study, several scholars have investigated individual allusions and echoes in Galatians, and we will draw upon their work as it proves helpful. However, to this point we are aware of no systematic investigation of Isaianic influence in Galatians, a lacuna which this study intends to fill.

Review of Relevant Literature

3

But as our investigation will demonstrate, Paul does not draw equally from all parts of Isaiah. While it is true that Paul (and his contemporaries) regarded the book of Isaiah as a unified whole, 7 the fact remains that some portions were regarded as more significant than others in the process of theological reflection. Isaiah 40–66 appears to have been particularly significant for Paul’s theology in general, and Galatians in particular.8 This study, therefore, investigates the influence of Isaiah 40–66 in Galatians. Once we have demonstrated significant Isaianic influence within Galatians, we will then explore how the presence of Isaianic influence should inform our understanding of Galatians as well as larger issues within Paul’s thinking. In order to situate the present inquiry properly, however, it is necessary to review some of the relevant literature.

1.2 Review of Relevant Literature Review of Relevant Literature Given the significant amount of literature that exists on the use of the OT in the NT,9 the following survey must be both selective and brief. We will begin with those studies that examine Paul’s use of the OT.

1.2.1 Studies on Paul’s Use of the Old Testament The academic study of Paul’s use of the OT has a long and respectable pedigree that stretches back at least one hundred years. 10 Yet the last 7 8

9

10

For further discussion of the unity of Isaiah, see §1.6 below. Based on the list of “Loci Citati vel Allegati” in NA27 (789-93), Paul cites or alludes to passages from Isaiah 108 times in his thirteen letters. Significantly, two-thirds (72) of those come from Isa 40–66. Even more importantly, 37 of the 108 references are from Isa 49–55. Only two Isaianic references are listed for Galatians in NA27 — the doubtful echo of Isa 37:19 in 4:8 and the citation of Isa 54:1 in 4:27. Our analysis will demonstrate that there are many more. The literature in this area continues to grow rapidly; for helpful overviews see the following: C. Brekelmans, Menahem Haran, and Magne Sæbø, eds., Hebrew Bible, Old Testament: The History of its Interpretation (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1996); Martin J. Mulder and Harry Sysling, Mikra: Text, Translation, Reading, and Interpretation of the Hebrew Bible in Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity (CRINT 1; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1988); and D. A. Carson and H. G. M. Williamson, eds., It is Written: Scripture Citing Scripture: Essays in Honour of Barnabas Lindars, SSF (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988). In addition to the studies treated below, see, e.g., the following: Otto Michel, Paulus und seine Bibel (repr. of 1929 ed.; BFCT 18; Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1972); C. H. Dodd, According to the Scriptures: The Sub-Structure of New Testament Theology (New York: Scribner, 1953); Ellis, Paul’s Use of the Old Testament; Neal

4


thirty years in particular have seen a number of significant studies that have altered the landscape. The use of literary tools (studies on intertextuality especially) has been particularly significant in this recent period. A roughly chronological survey of the most significant works of the past thirty years will establish the context for this study. We begin with the work of Dietrich-Alex Koch.11 His primary interest lies in how Paul both understands and applies scripture, focusing on citations. The appearance of his study in 1986 was the first significant attempt since the work of E. Earle Ellis in 1957 to synthesize Paul’s use of scripture.12 With respect to Paul’s Vorlage, Koch concludes that he primarily drew from a Greek text that has already been revised to more closely follow the Hebrew.13 This, however, does not account for all of the deviations from the LXX text. Paul himself modified the text frequently,14 with these alterations ranging from the minor (e.g., changes in person and number) to the significant (e.g., omissions of potentially difficult portions of a text). With respect to Paul’s understanding of scripture, Koch argues that for Paul scripture functioned in a variety of ways, such as to illustrate, clarify, confirm and/or prove a point. Paul used scripture most often when addressing the subjects of christology, the relationship between the righteousness of God and the Law, and ethical instruction. Scripture spoke to the Christian communities not only about their present circumstances, but also about their future.

11 12 13 14

Flanagan, "Messianic Fulfillment in St. Paul," CBQ 19 (1957): 474-84; Joseph A. Fitzmyer, "The Use of Explicit Old Testament Quotations in the Qumran Literature and in the New Testament," NTS 7 (1960-1961): 297-333; Barnabas Lindars, New Testament Apologetic: The Doctrinal Significance of the Old Testament Quotations (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1961); James Barr, Old and New in Interpretation: A Study of the Two Testaments (London: S.C.M. Press, 1966); Anthony T. Hanson, Studies in Paul's Technique and Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974); Richard N. Longenecker, Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period (2d ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999); Morna D. Hooker, "Beyond the Things that are Written? St. Paul's Use of Scripture," NTS 27 (1981): 295-309. For a thorough survey of developments in the study of Paul’s use of scripture, see Andrew H. Wakefield, Where to Live: The Hermeneutical Significance of Paul's Citations from Scripture in Galatians 3:1-14 (Academia Biblica 14; Boston: Brill, 2003), 57-96. For a helpful assessment of the current state of the question within the academy, see now Stanley E. Porter and Christopher D. Stanley, eds., As It is Written: Studying Paul’s Use of Scripture (SBLSymS 50; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2008). Dietrich-Alex Koch, Die Schrift als Zeuge des Evangeliums: Untersuchungen zur Verwendung und zum Verständnis der Schrift bei Paulus (BHT 69; Tübingen: Mohr, 1986). Ellis, Paul’s Use of the Old Testament. For a discussion of the various text forms of the Greek Old Testament, see below, 2526. Of the 93 citations identified, Koch (Schrift als Zeuge, 186-90) claims that Paul has altered 52 of them.


5

While Koch’s conclusions are more focused on Paul’s application of scripture than the apostle’s understanding of the OT, Koch’s study is a valuable contribution to Paul’s use of scripture. Perhaps no scholar has had a greater role in shaping the recent discussion of Paul’s appropriation of the OT than Richard Hays. In Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul,15 Hays listens carefully for “scriptural echoes” in selected passages of Paul, and from those discerned echoes seeks to reconstruct Paul’s hermeneutical approach to scripture. What sets his approach apart from previous studies is Hays’s explicitly literary approach centered on intertextuality, and in particular his use of the category of echo.16 Drawing on the work of literary critic John Hollander,17 Hays claims that an echo “functions to suggest to the reader that text B should be understood in light of a broad interplay with text A, encompassing aspects of A beyond those explicitly echoed.”18 The linking of these texts generates a hermeneutical event in which “new meanings” are created by the (often unexpected) correspondences and contrasts between the two texts.19 After explaining this approach in the introductory chapter, Hays offers three chapters in which he applies his approach to selections in Romans, 1–2 Corinthians, and Galatians. His conclusion is that Paul’s reading of scripture centered on the “prefiguration of the church as the people of God,” a hermeneutic Hays refers to as “ecclesiocentric.”20 The most significant result of Hays’s study has been a greater willingness to explore the influence of the OT in the Pauline corpus beyond explicit citations and even allusions. Although Hays’s work has not been universally embraced, 21 it has definitively 15 16

17 18 19 20 21

Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1989). It is hard to overstate the significance of Hays’s work for the study of the OT in the NT in the almost twenty years since publication. He is largely responsible for the prominence of the word “echo” in the recent discussion, a term so prevalent in the literature that even those who do not use it feel the obligation to explain why they choose not to do so. Furthermore, his proposal has called forth a significant number of responses; among them see especially the following: Craig A. Evans and James A. Sanders, Paul and the Scriptures of Israel (JSNTSup 83 / SSEJC 1; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993); Kenneth D. Litwak, "Echoes of Scripture? A Critical Survey of Recent Works on Paul's Use of the Old Testament," Currents in Research: Biblical Studies 6 (1998): 260-88; and Daniel Boyarin, Intertextuality and the Reading of Midrash (Indiana Studies in Biblical Literature; Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990). John Hollander, The Figure of Echo: A Mode of Allusion in Milton and After (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1981). Hays, Echoes, 20. Ibid., 24. Ibid., 86. Among the more trenchant criticisms are those of William Scott Green, "Doing the Text's Work for It: Richard Hays on Paul's Use of Scripture," in Paul and the scriptures

6


shaped the discussion of the issue, and more importantly has resulted in a greater attention to methodological approaches to OT influence on Paul. More recently, Hays has published a collection of ten essays entitled The Conversion of the Imagination: Paul as Interpreter of Israel’s Scripture.22 The goal of this collection “is to explore what Scripture looks like within Paul’s imaginative narrative world.”23 In the introduction, Hays draws out five key themes from his study of Paul’s reading of scripture: he does so (1) pastorally in the service of community formation; (2) poetically; (3) narratively; (4) eschatologically focused on the death/resurrection of Messiah;24 and (5) trustingly (xv-xvi). Thus this collection of essays is intended as an extension of the approach presented in Echoes of Scripture, with only very minor tweaking. Similar to the concern of Koch is that of Christopher Stanley. 25 By examining Paul’s explicit citations of scripture, Stanley attempts to describe Paul’s techniques in appropriating the OT.26 He concludes that

22 23 24 25 26

of Israel (ed. Craig A. Evans and James A. Sanders; JSNT 83/ SSEJC 1; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 58-63 and Johan Christiaan Beker, "Echoes and Intertextuality: On the Role of Scripture in Paul's Theology," in Paul and the Scriptures of Israel (ed. Craig A. Evans and James A. Sanders; JSNT 83 / SSEJC 1; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 64-69; for a response, see Richard B. Hays, "On the Rebound: A Response to the Critiques of Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul," in Paul and the Scriptures of Israel (ed. James A. Sanders and Craig A. Evans; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), 7096. Green questions whether it is possible to adopt an intertextual approach without the accompanying ideological presuppositions of poststructural semiotics (59-60). By way of response Hays rightly argues that “the literary-critical operation of tracing the meaning-effects created by Paul’s intertextual figurations is in principle neutral with regard to metatheories about language and truth” (80). Beker questions whether Paul’s readers would have caught many of these subtle scriptural echoes, since Paul’s intent was clear and persuasive communication (65). But Hays cogently replies that “the fact that Paul was trying to communicate in contingent situations does not mean that he could not have used allusive echoes in his letters. When they are understood, allusions are potent strategies of communication. On the other hand, many uses of echoes and allusions are unpremeditated, subconscious; they are grasped consciously, even by their author, only sometimes” (86). For further discussion of the role the audience’s capabilities plays in determining the presence of allusions and echoes, see below, §1.5.2. Richard B. Hays, The Conversion of the Imagination: Paul as Interpreter of Israel's Scripture (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005). Ibid., x. This fourth point is a development from Hays’s earlier “ecclesiocentric” understanding of Paul’s, and in our estimation is a more accurate assessment. Christopher D. Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture: Citation Technique in the Pauline Epistles and Contemporary Literature (SNTSMS 69; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992). Stanley limits his investigation to those citations that “offer a clear indication to the reader that a quotation is indeed present” (37). This is determined by the presence of an introductory formula, an interpretive gloss, and/or “demonstrable syntactical ten-


7

Paul’s Vorlage, although diverse, was some type of written collection from which Paul felt the freedom to deviate to suit his purposes. These alterations ranged from the minor (e.g., changing the grammar to fit the new context) to the more significant (e.g., eliminating words deemed to be irrelevant, repetitive, or perhaps even counterproductive to his argument). Stanley then compares Paul’s citation technique to both Greco-Roman and Jewish practices and concludes that Paul’s approach fits right in with the practices of both Greco-Roman and Jewish authors. In a subsequent volume, Stanley considers the rhetorical force of Paul’s scriptural citations.27 Using the configurational model of Eugene White,28 he seeks to answer the question “How well do Paul’s quotations cohere with his own rhetorical aims and the needs and capabilities of his first-century audience?”29 Using a blend of rhetorical and literary approaches, Stanley attempts to reconstruct how different elements of Paul’s audience would have responded to his use of scripture.30 After a selective survey of citations in 1–2 Corinthians, Galatians,

27 28 29 30

sion” with the context (37). There are two fundamental weaknesses in this approach, however. First, if the goal is to determine the citation technique of an author, why is the competence of the reader the final arbiter of what is included in the study? Second, Stanley’s approach (as he himself admits, 37) excludes a number of texts where Paul is clearly citing scripture (e.g., Rom 10:13, 11:34-35; 12:20; 1 Cor 2:16; 5:13; 10:26; 15:32; 2 Cor 9:7; 10:17; 13:1; Gal 3:11), and yet does not include one of Stanley’s three criteria. One wonders how different Stanley’s results would have been had such examples been incorporated. Christopher D. Stanley, Arguing with Scripture: The Rhetoric of Quotations in the Letters of Paul (New York: T & T Clark, 2004). Eugene E. White, The Context of Human Discourse: A Configurational Criticism of Rhetoric (Studies in Rhetoric/Communication; Columbia, S.C.: University of South Carolina Press, 1992). Stanley, Arguing with Scripture, 20. Stanley divides the audience into three segments: (1) the informed audience, who know the original context of Paul’s citations and desire to critically analyze them; (2) the comeptent audience, who know enough of the OT to understand the point of Paul’s citation in their present context; and (3) the minimal audience, who have little or no specific familiarity with the OT. His reconstruction of these three strata of audience is grounded in his analysis of nine key assumptions he finds prevalent in discussions of Paul’s use of the OT: (1) Paul’s audiences acknowledged the authority of the Jewish Scriptures as a source of truth and a guide for Christian conduct; (2) Paul and his audience(s) had relatively free access to the Greek version of the Jewish Scriptures (“the LXX”) and could study and consult them whenever they wished; (3) Paul’s audiences routinely read and studied the Jewish Scriptures for themselves in his absence; (4) Paul’s audiences were able to recognize and appreciate all of his quotations, allusions, and “echoes” from the Jewish Scriptures; (5) Paul composed his letters with the expectation that the recipients would know and supply the background and context for his many quotations, allusions, and other references to the Jewish Scriptures; (6) Paul himself knew and took into account the original context of his biblical quotations; (7) Paul expected his audiences to evaluate and accept his interpretations of scripture; (8) Paul

8


and Romans, he concludes that Paul predominantly crafted his citations in such a way as to make knowledge of the OT context unnecessary for understanding his point. Paul’s most common use of scripture was as an appeal to divine authority, though other uses are evident as well. Stanley concludes that Paul was likely an effective rhetorician when using the OT, though his ignorance of his audience’s lack of familiarity with specific passages from the OT may have significantly limited that effectiveness in certain situations. In contrast to the linguistic approach of Hays and the focus on citation techniques by Koch and Stanley, Timothy Lim compares Paul’s appropriation of scripture with that found at Qumran, with particular attention to the pesharim.31 Lim concludes that while Paul shared the Qumran concern for discerning God’s message in the present from scripture, his christocentric hermeneutic and firsthand experience of the risen Christ distinguish his exegesis from that of Qumran. More importantly, Lim argues that the state of the biblical text in Paul’s day was much more fluid than is often acknowledged, and consequently reconstructing Paul’s Vorlage is more complex than frequently recognized. Furthermore, the likelihood that Paul knew Aramaic and Hebrew in addition to Greek opens up the possibility that he had access to scripture in these languages; as a result the possibility that Paul renders his own translation from such texts cannot be dismissed. 32 All of these

31 32

expected everyone in his churches to have an equal appreciation of his biblical quotations; and (9) The best way to determine the “meaning” of a Pauline biblical quotation is to study how Paul interpreted the biblical text. Stanley gives qualified support to the first, and then largely dismisses the rest, concluding that “it seems unlikely that many of the people in Paul’s congregations knew the Jewish Scriptures well enough to evaluate his handling of the biblical text. It seems equally implausible that Paul expected them to do so . . . . Paul normally embeds his quotations in an interpretive framework that signals to the audience how he intends the biblical text to be understood. In these cases little or no knowledge of the original context is required; the quotation achieves its rhetorical effect as long as the audience acknowledges the authority of the Jewish Scriptures and accepts Paul’s reputation as a reliable interpreter of the holy text. In some cases Paul may have purposely targeted the more literate members of the congregation (especially those with more exposure to Judaism) on the assumption that they would explain to the illiterate majority the significance of the verses that he cites. In still other cases he might have gotten caught up in the flow of an argument and failed to consider whether his mostly Gentile audience would be able to comprehend his references to the Jewish Scriptures. No single answer can be posited for every passage; each text must be evaluated on its own merits” (60-61). In a more recent essay, Stanley has built on this line of argumentation; see Christopher D. Stanley, “Paul’s ‘Use’ of Scripture: Why the Audience Matters,” in As It is Written, 125-55. Timothy H. Lim, Holy Scripture in the Qumran Commentaries and Pauline Letters (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997). Ibid., 163-64.


9

factors lead to Lim’s salient conclusion that scholars must go beyond a quick comparison of a citation with the LXX to an analysis of all the possible textual forms available to Paul. Even with these qualifications, however, Lim concludes that Paul at times intentionally modified his scriptural citations to suit their new contexts, though the number of times Paul did so cannot easily be determined. Among the most recent contributors to the conversation has been Francis Watson, who argues that Paul reads the Torah as a coherent narrative.33 Within this narrative Paul hears a plurality of voices, two of which he plays off of each other. The first and primary voice is that of the unconditional promise of Genesis (particularized in Abraham). According to Watson, this promise forms the backbone of Paul’s soteriology. The Sinai revelation is the second voice Paul hears within the Torah, which promises life to those who obey all that is written in the book of the law and curses those who do not. Paul exploits these two “contradictory” voices to produce a provocative reading of the Torah in service of gospel proclamation. Galatians 3 is particularly exemplary, where Paul (1) draws material from the Abraham narrative (Gal 3:6-8, 14-18), (2) coordinates the Abrahamic promise with the Sinai revelation (Gal 3:15-18), (3) interprets the Sinai event (Gal 3:17-20), (4) describes the law’s promise of life to those who obey (Gal 3:12) and (5) its curse upon those who transgress (Gal 3:10).34 The Christ-event shapes Paul’s reading of the Torah and vice versa, leading to the conclusion “Scripture is promise and law, and Christ is the promise’s fulfilment [sic] and the law’s end.”35 This brief overview of studies reveals three prominent trends that have been incorporated into the present work. The first is a greater sensitivity to the difficult task of reconstructing Paul’s textual Vorlage. Earlier studies such as those by Ellis and even Longenecker took place at a time when the diversity of textual traditions for the Greek OT that existed in Paul’s day was not fully appreciated. Consequently, they were not in the best position to assess in particular the extent to which Paul modified his citations for his own purposes. The significant advances in textual criticism of the Greek OT of the past 30 years now make possible a much more sophisticated approach to reconstructing Paul’s textual Vorlage, and enable a more accurate assessment of the extent to

33 34 35

Francis Watson, Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith (London: T & T Clark International, 2004). Ibid., 515-16. Ibid., 517.

10


which Paul altered the wording of his scriptural appropriations for his own purposes.36 Second, the use of literary-critical tools has produced a much greater sensitivity to the pervasive influence of scripture on the NT authors, including Paul. As Hays has persuasively demonstrated, scriptural influence is present in Paul even in those places where he does not explicitly cite the OT. Consequently, in order for a fuller picture of Paul’s use of scripture to emerge, it is necessary to move beyond the explicit citations to a broader approach that actively seeks to determine the presence of allusions and even echoes of scripture. Only when these more indirect appropriations of scripture are included will we be in a position to assess Paul’s use of scripture. Third, the emphasis on the narrative nature of Paul’s reading of scripture has added a much needed correction to the misperception of some that Paul is largely if not exclusively engaged in a “proof-texting” approach that is devoid of concern for the original context of the scriptural passage.37 When Paul cites or alludes to an OT passage, he often does so with the larger context in mind.38 While scholars may differ as to the contours of the narrative they discern in Paul’s use of scripture, a growing number are exploring the possibility of coherence among citations and allusions not only from the same OT book but from even larger sections of scripture as well. Given our focus on Isaiah, we will seek to pay particular attention to the possibility that Paul’s use of Isaiah betrays a narrative pattern. All three developments provide important tools for the present study. There is no good reason why careful attention to textual critical issues cannot be combined with an explicitly literary approach to produce a better understanding of Paul’s use of scripture. Such a combination will furthermore make identifying any potential narrative pattern more plausible and demonstrable. Therefore this study seeks to incor36 37 38

For a discussion of the various text forms of the Greek Old Testament, see below, 2526. For various forms of this view, see Gregory K. Beale, ed., The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994), 137-63. Only out of extreme caution have we said “often” rather than “usually” or even “always.” For arguments supporting the claim that the NT authors were sensitive to the OT context of their citations and allusions, see the essays in Beale, Right Doctrine, 167-276. Our own research suggests that the NT authors were in fact sensitive to the OT context; at the very least the interpreter should diligently attempt to determine any contact points before too quickly concluding none exist. Among the first to emphasize the importance of the OT context for studying an OT citation was Dodd, According to the Scriptures, 130-33.


11

porate the best developments in recent study of Paul’s use of scripture, and in doing so contribute to the larger scholarly conversation. Yet before spelling out how this will be done, we must next turn to those studies that look specifically at Paul’s use of Isaiah

1.2.2 Studies on Paul’s Use of Isaiah As a result of the renewed attention to Paul’s use of the OT, the importance of Isaiah for Paul’s theology has been consistently confirmed.39 Yet Paul is not the only NT author to appropriate Isaianic motifs at a fundamental level. Recent works have demonstrated the significance of Isaiah for each of the synoptic gospels, as well as Acts.40 The presence of Isaianic citations, allusions and echoes in virtually every letter in the Pauline corpus, however, convincingly demonstrates the formative place Isaiah held in the apostle’s theological framework.41 Although a number of works have pursued the importance of Isaiah for Paul, 42 three deserve special mention. 39

40

41 42

Hays is at least partially correct when he says that “the reasons for this are not difficult to fathom. Isaiah, more clearly than any other OT book, links the promise of the redemption and restoration of Israel to the hope that Israel’s God will also reveal his mercy to the Gentiles and establish sovereignty over the whole earth. Thus, Paul finds in Isaiah — particularly the prophecies of Deutero-Isaiah — a prefiguration of his own distinctive apostolic ministry to the Gentiles”; see Richard B. Hays, "'Who Has Believed Our Message?' Paul's Reading of Isaiah," SBLSP 37 (1998): 205-25. For a very recent collection of essays on the prominence of Isaiah in the NT, see Steve Moyise and M. J. J. Menken, eds., Isaiah in the New Testament (The New Testament and the Scriptures of Israel; New York: T & T Clark, 2005). With respect to individual NT books, see, e.g., the following: for Matthew, Adrian M. Leske, "Isaiah and Matthew: The Prophetic Influence in the First Gospel: A Report on Current Research," in Jesus and the Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins (ed. W. H. Bellinger and William R. Farmer; Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity Press, 1998), 152-69; on Mark, Rikki E. Watts, Isaiah's New Exodus in Mark (Biblical Studies Library; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000); on Luke-Acts, David W. Pao, Acts and the Isaianic New Exodus (Biblical Studies Library; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002); on Revelation, Jan Fekkes, Isaiah and Prophetic Traditions in the Book of Revelation: Visionary Antecedents and their Development (JSNTSup 93; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994). Of the thirteen Pauline letters, only Philemon lacks an Isaianic citation, allusion, or echo. See, e.g., the following: J. J. Collins, "Rabinic Exegesis and Pauline Exegesis Part II: Pauline Exegesis," CBQ 3 (1941): 145-58; Ulrich Mauser, "Paulus als Theologe des Alten Testaments," Jahrbuch für Biblische Theologie 6 (1991): 47-68; Oss, “Paul’s Use of Isaiah”; and Craig A. Evans, "Paul and the Prophets: Prophetic Criticism in the Epistle to the Romans (with special reference to Romans 9–11)," in Romans and the People of God: Essays in Honor of Gordon D. Fee on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday (ed. Gordon D. Fee, Sven Soderlund, and N. T. Wright; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 11528.

12


The first of these is the study by Florian Wilk.43 His goal is “zu ermitteln wie und wozu Paulus in seinen Briefen auf das Jesajabuch Bezug nimmt.”44 After examining Isaianic citations and allusions, Wilk concludes that Paul’s appropriation of Isaiah centers around four main themes: the message about Christ, Paul’s self-understanding, the question of Israel’s present and future status, and the expectation of the parousia. These themes, according to Wilk, should be understood as interconnected, forming a coherent storyline. Christ is the fulfillment of God’s promised salvation (Christusbotschaft), and Paul is God’s chosen messenger of this salvation to the Gentiles (Selbstverständnis). Yet the widespread Jewish rejection of Christ and the equally widespread Gentile acceptance of Christ raise the question of Israel’s future (Israelfrage). The solution Paul saw from Isaiah was the future salvation of Israel when Christ returns (Parusieerwartung). Wilk’s sweeping study concludes with an attempt to trace the development of Paul’s understanding of Isaiah throughout his life, concluding that there were four discernible “stages [Stationen]” to this development. 45 What initially 43

44

45

Florian Wilk, Die Bedeutung des Jesajabuches für Paulus (FRLANT 179; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1998). For a helpful review of Wilk as well as the study by Wagner to be discussed below, see Moisés Silva, "Die Bedeutung des Jesajabuches für Paulus/Heralds of the Good News: Isaiah and Paul in Concert in the Letter to the Romans (Review)," WTJ 66 (2004): 433-39. Ibid., 8. Wilk’s study is limited to the seven “unbestrittenen Briefe” of Romans, 1–2 Corinthians (minus 2 Cor 6:14–7:1, which is excluded on form-critical grounds as inauthentic), Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon. Additionally, although acknowledging that Isaiah’s influence on Paul extends to larger motifs, Wilk limits his inquiry to citations and allusions that can be linguistically verified (Bedeutung des Jesajabuches, 8-11). The four stages are as follows: (1) Beginning (Anknüpfen) — Paul inherits elements from Jewish and early-Christian traditions, focused on the expectation of the parousia (1 Thessalonians); (2) Self Re-discovery (Sich-Wiederfinden) — Paul discovers passages that illuminate his apostolic identity (Galatians); (3) Employment (Anwenden) — Paul sees specific tasks dictated in Isaiah as programmatic for his apostolic role (Galatians; 1–2 Corinthians); (4) Composite (Büdeln) — Paul demonstrates a holistic understanding of Isaiah in which he incorporates all four of the elements of his use of Isaiah (Romans). Even if Wilk’s ordering of the epistles is correct, one may legitimately question whether Paul’s understanding and application of Isaiah is in fact developing during this time period; it seems more likely that the specific circumstances of the communities addressed dictated what Isaianic passages and subjects were treated. Furthermore, we seriously question whether Paul’s understanding of his apostolic call and mission against an Isaianic backdrop can be relegated to so late in his career. Seyoon Kim has forcefully argued that Paul associated his conversion and apostolic calling with the Isaianic Servant Songs from a very early stage, perhaps even in the weeks and months after his conversion; see Seyoon Kim, The Origin of Paul's Gospel (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 51-99; Seyoon Kim, Paul and the New Perspective: Second Thoughts on the Origins of Paul's Gospel (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 101-27. But even if one does not agree with Kim’s assessment that Paul made such an immediate connection between his apostolic ministry and Isaiah, he is


13

began with an attempt to understand his apostolic self-identity and mission to the Gentiles eventually culminated in the conclusion that, despite Israel’s rejection of the gospel, God will remain faithful to his promises by bringing salvation to Israel at the return of Christ so that all Israel might be saved (Rom 11:25-26). The same year that Wilk’s monograph was published, Richard B. Hays published an important essay on Paul’s use of Isaiah.46 Although most of the article is devoted to an elaboration on the seven criteria for discerning echoes, Hays sketches a rough narrative that emerges from a study of Paul’s explicit quotations from Isaiah. 47 The contours of that narrative are as follows: (1) Israel is separated from God by their hardhearted disobedience; (2) God has not abandoned Israel, but instead preserved a faithful remnant; (3) God has brought about the promise of eschatological salvation in Christ, causing the majority of Israel to stumble; (4) God has called Paul to announce this message to the Gentiles; (5) Not all believe this message because it offends the wisdom of Israel and the Gentiles; (6) Despite this, God will redeem Israel in the end and establish his sovereignty over the whole world; (7) God’s mercy is overhwleming and incomprehensible. After listing these distinct movements in the narrative, Hays concludes by noting “The story [Paul] reads in the Isaiah scroll is closely constrained by Isaiah’s original plotline of Israel’s exile and restoration, accompanied by God’s radical eschatological renewal that embraces the whole Gentile world.”48 The third significant study is that of J. Ross Wagner, who explores Paul’s appropriation of Isaiah in Romans.49 Focusing his attention on chapters 9–11, as well as chapter 15, Wagner builds on the insights of previous studies (i.e., Koch, Stanley, Hays, and Lim) to determine “the logic and function of Paul’s appropriation of Isaiah.” 50 The result is a study that insightfully blends the literary approach of Hays with the text-critical sensitivity of Koch, Stanley and Lim. Three issues run

46 47 48 49

50

likely much closer to the mark than Wilk in positing an early engagement with Isaiah for Paul. Richard B. Hays, “Who has Believed,” 205-25. This same essay is also available in Conversion of the Imagination, 25-49. All subsequent references will be taken from the latter. Hays, Conversion of the Imagination, 45-47. Although he focuses primarily on the quotations in Romans, Hays does draw in citations from other Pauline letters. Ibid., 46. J. R. Wagner, Heralds of the Good News: Isaiah and Paul in Concert in the Letter to the Romans (Leiden: Brill, 2003). The similarities between Wagner and Hays are more than conincidental, as Hays was the doctoral supervisor for Wagner’s project. In turn Hays even expresses his indebtedness to Wagner for stimulating dialogue on Paul’s reading of Isaiah (Conversion of the Imagination, xi). Ibid., 14.

14


throughout the monograph: (1) the Isaianic texts Paul used and their broader Isaianic context; (2) Paul’s interpretive/hermeneutical approach; and (3) the contribution of these Isaianic references to the larger argument of Romans.51 Wagner concludes that Paul appropriated Isaiah in a manner closely attentive to the original context. When Paul read Isaiah, he saw a “veiled prefiguration” of his own gospel mission to the Gentiles, as well as the promise that God will remain faithful to Israel despite her present rejection of the gospel. There will yet come a day when all Israel will be saved, and “Jew and Gentile together [will] sing the glories of God’s name.” Wagner summarizes, “[t]he story of God, Israel, and the Gentiles that Paul tells in Romans reflects the dynamic interplay of his foundational convictions, his reading of Israel’s scriptures, his labors in mission, and his cultural and historical contexts.”52 These studies by Wilk, Hays and Wagner decisively demonstrate the significance of Isaiah for Paul, even though their approaches differ. Wilk’s effort to examine the entirety of the Pauline corpus, while admirable, ultimately suffers from its self-imposed limits.53 Before such a task can be satisfactorily completed, studies of Isaianic influence in each of the Pauline letters need to be undertaken that explore not only “linguistically verifiable” examples of Isaianic influence, but also consider the presence of broader Isaianic motifs and themes. 54 Towards this end the study by Wagner is a definite step in the right direction, but it too (by necessity) is limited to only portions of Romans, and not the entirety of the letter. Studying each individual letter in its own right is a necessary first step towards a larger synthesis of Isaianic influence in Paul’s thought. The rough narrative sketched by Hays is certainly suggestive, but needs further assessment in light of Paul’s reading of Isaiah demonstrated elsewhere in his letters. The present study attempts to enter the conversation on how Paul read and used Isaiah through the doors of his letter to the Galatians. By carefully working through how Paul uses Isaiah in Galatians we will be in a better position to evaluate the proposals of Wilk and Hays regarding how Paul read Isaiah. Before laying out our approach, however, a

51 52 53

54

Ibid., 19. Ibid., 356-59. The quotes are taken from 356. See n. 44 above. The omission of 2 Cor 6:14–7:1 is especially unfortunate, since, as G.K. Beale has argued, Isaianic influence actually suggests the originality of the passage; see Gregory K. Beale, "The Old Testament Background of Reconciliation in 2 Corinthians 5–7," in The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New (ed. Gregory K. Beale; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994), 217-47. Cp. the similar criticism of Silva, “Bedeutung des Jesajabuches,” 435.


15

brief sketch of some of the significant recent works on Galatians, with a focus on those studies that examine Paul’s use of the OT, is necessary.

1.2.3 Studies on Galatians Galatians continues to be a well-plowed field of study.55 While any number of studies could be singled out for specific mention, the following four are the most relevant for the present study. We begin with the work of Richard Hays.56 He argues that the structure of Paul’s argument in Galatians 3:1–4:11 is fundamentally based on a narrative substructure about Jesus Christ. Using the actantial analysis of A.J. Greimas as a starting point,57 Hays attempts to uncover this narrative substructure. At various points this narrative breaks through to the surface (i.e., 3:13-14; 4:3-6), albeit in a fragmentary way; this is to be expected because both Paul and his readers are already familiar with the story. All that is necessary is to refer to elements of that shared story and draw the appropriate conclusions. According to Hays, the underlying narrative centers on the faithfulness of Jesus Christ in accomplishing the redemption of God’s people. Therefore Paul’s emphasis in discussing justification rests on the faithfulness of Christ, not on our faith in Christ. 58 As a result faith “is not the precondition for receiving God’s blessing; instead, it is the appropriate mode of response to a blessing already given in Christ.” 59 Hays’s focus on the narrative substructure of Paul’s thought has played a significant

55

56 57 58

59

In addition to the studies surveyed here, see also Hansen, Abraham in Galatians; John M. G. Barclay, Obeying the Truth: Paul's Ethics in Galatians (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991); Charles H. Cosgrove, The Cross and the Spirit: A Study in the Argument and Theology of Galatians (Macon, GA: Mercer, 1988); Hans-Joachim Eckstein, Verheissung und Gesetz: Eine exegetische Untersuchung zu Galater 2,15–4,7 (WUNT 86; Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1996); Howard, Paul: Crisis in Galatia; and Morland, Rhetoric of Curse. Richard B. Hays, The Faith of Jesus Christ: The Narrative Substructure of Galatians 3:1– 4:11 (2d ed.; Biblical Resource Series; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002). The two essential works are Algirdas J. Greimas, Sémantique Structurale (Paris: Larousse, 1966), and Algirdas J. Greimas, Du Sens (Paris: Seuil, 1970). Bound up with this conclusion is the argument that the word Cristou/ in the phrase pi,stij Cristou/ (and its variants; see 2:16 [2x]; 2:20; 3:22; also Rom 3:26 and Phil 3:9) should be understood as a subjective rather than objective genitive. For an exchange of views on this, see the classic essays by Hays and James D. G. Dunn in Hays, Faith, 249-98. More recently, see now Michael F. Bird and Preston M. Sprinkle, eds., The Faith of Jesus Christ: Exegetical, Biblical, and Theological Studies (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2009). Ibid., 211.

16


role in the recent scholarly interest in the narrative element(s) of Pauline theology.60 The study by Roy Ciampa focuses on both the presence and the function of scripture in Galatians 1–2.61 Moving beyond the citations, allusions and echoes of scripture, Ciampa also explores the “scriptural background behind the words, concepts, idioms, topics, structures and concerns” present in Galatians 1–2.62 He does this by following the approach of Hays, but with a particular view to the rhetorical significance of the scriptural references. His conclusion is that scripture was used primarily in Galatians 1–2 to emphasize the credibility of Paul’s authority, resulting in the “redescription” of himself, his opponents, his message, his Gentile converts and even scripture itself.63 This was accomplished by placing all of the above within an apocalyptic-restorationist framework in which the Christ-event signals the “dramatic and climactic in-breaking of the eschatological age of salvation . . . which heralds the end of pre-resurrection history.”64 This careful work helpfully demonstrates that Paul used scripture in ways that were direct and indirect, obvious and subtle, and all points in between. Scripture for Paul was much more than an authoritative source; it projected a world in which Paul was able to situate the present realities of the church. More recently, Andrew Wakefield has explored the hermeneutical significance of the scriptural references in Galatians 3:1-14.65 After reviewing the variety of scholarly approaches to this difficult text, Wakefield proposes that an intertextual approach illuminates how Paul used scriptural citations. By singling out the citations, Wakefield identifies a chiastic structure that centers on the citations of Hab 2:4 and Lev 18:5, a pairing which contrasts not two alternative ways of gaining life (i.e., soteriology), but rather two alternative ways of living a righteous life 60

61 62 63 64 65

See, e.g., the following: Norman R. Petersen, Rediscovering Paul: Philemon and the Sociology of Paul's Narrative World (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985), 1-88; N. T. Wright, The New Testament and the People of God (Christian Origins and the Question of God 1; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992), 47-80; Stephen E. Fowl, The Story of Christ in the Ethics of Paul: An Analysis of the Function of the Hymnic Material in the Pauline Corpus (JSNTSup 36; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1990), 197-211; Ben Witherington, Paul's Narrative Thought World: Tapestry of Tragedy and Triumph (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1994), 1-7, 352-55; James D. G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul the Apostle (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 18-19; and the essays in Bruce W. Longenecker, ed., Narrative Dynamics in Paul: A Critical Assessment (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002). Roy E. Ciampa, The Presence and Function of Scripture in Galatians 1 and 2 (WUNT 102; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998). Ibid., 22. Ibid., 223-32. Ibid., 232. Wakefield, Where to Live.


17

(i.e., eschatological/ethical).66 These citations reveal Paul’s presupposition that these passages of scripture were both authoritative and applicable to the situation he is presently addressing. As a result of this intertextual reading of Gal 3:1-14, Wakefield concludes that the central problem Paul had with the Law was that it was part of the old age, which had come to an end with the coming of Christ and the gift of the Spirit. Those attempting to return to the Law were confused as to the “age” in which they lived.67 Although more narrow in its focus, the monograph by Preston Sprinkle is an important contribution to Paul’s use of the OT in Galatians.68 Sprinkle explores “the theological significance of Lev 18:5 in early Judaism and in Paul, and how their respective interpretations of this passage compare with each other.“69 After examining Lev 18:5 in its original context, Sprinkle then traces allusions to this text within the OT itself and Jewish literature from 200 B.C.E. to 100 C.E. This survey sets the stage for his examination of Lev 18:5 in Gal 3:12 and Rom 10:5. By pairing Lev 18:5 with Hab 2:4 in Gal 3:11-12, Paul presents these two OT texts as antithetical soteriologies, “two different ways to escape the covenantal curse and attain the blessing of life.”70 The crux of the contrast is between divine agency exercised through the death of Christ (Hab 2:4) and human agency that cannot rescue from the curse of the Law (Lev 18:5). All four of these studies provide helpful and important insights into selected portions of Galatians. Hays’s attention to the narrative elements in Galatians has been an impetus to more careful attention to narrative elements in epistolary literature, even among those who do not agree with his conclusions on the presence or content of such a narrative. The careful work of Ciampa shows the pervasive influence of scripture on Paul’s thinking, even when he is not explicitly citing or alluding to an OT passage, and will be a constant dialogue partner in chapter two. Although limited to 3:1-14, Wakefield’s use of insights from intertextuality to unravel the complexity of Paul’s argument holds forth promise for other difficult passages, though it remains to be seen 66 67

68 69 70

Although Wakefield prefers the term “eschatological” to “ethical,” the manner in which he uses “eschatological” makes it clear that ethical concerns are encompassed. In this respect there are clearly similarities between Wakefield’s conclusions and the approach of J. L. Martyn, Galatians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 33A; New York: Doubleday, 1997). There are, however, important differences; see Wakefield, Where to Live, 49-54, 190-201. Preston M. Sprinkle, Law and Life: The Interpretation of Leviticus 18:5 in Early Judaism and in Paul (WUNT 241; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2008). Ibid., 1. Ibid., 140.

18


whether such an approach works with allusions and echoes of scripture as well. Sprinkle’s monograph shows the value of situating Paul’s use of an OT text within the larger context of Second Temple Jewish interpretive traditions. This representative overview of the relevant literature demonstrates both the prominence and promise of literary tools for understanding Paul’s use of the OT in general, and Galatians in particular. Several of these studies reveal the special significance of Isaiah in Paul’s theological and pastoral reflection, though the pervasiveness of this Isaianic influence is only beginning to be established in each individual letter. At the same time, however, a strictly literary approach is insufficient to appreciate Paul’s appropriation of Isaiah. In order for the full picture to emerge, we must situate Paul’s reading of Isaiah within his broader historical and cultural context.

1.3 Paul’s Reading of Isaiah within Second Temple Judaism Paul’s Reading of Isaiah within Second Temple Judaism Paul’s reading of Isaiah did not take place in a vacuum. If we are to take seriously Paul’s own descriptions of his Jewish background (Rom 11:1; 2 Cor 11:22; Phil 3:5-6), as well as the corroborating evidence given in Acts (22:3-5; 26:4-8),71 we must constantly remember that Paul’s reading 71

The historical reliability and value of Acts in reconstructing the early Christian movement in general and Paul’s life in particular remain hotly disputed issues that cannot be resolved here. We are persuaded that Acts contains independent and reliable information about Paul and his ministry, and will accordingly draw upon it when pertinent. For a defense of the historical reliability of Acts in general, see Martin Hengel, Acts and the History of Earliest Christianity (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980); W. W. Gasque, A History of the Interpretation of the Acts of the Apostles (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1989); Colin J. Hemer, The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History (WUNT 49; Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1989), 1-243; and especially Bruce W. Winter, ed., The Book of Acts in its First Century Setting (6 vols.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 19931996). With specific reference to the value of Acts for reliable information on Paul, see F. F. Bruce, "Is the Paul of Acts the Real Paul?," BJRL 58 (1975-1976): 282-305; Joseph A. Fitzmyer, The Acts of the Apostles (AB 31; New York: Doubleday, 1998), 12941; Ben Witherington, The Acts of the Apostles: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 430-38; Stanley E. Porter, Paul in Acts (Peabody: Hendrickson, 2001), 205-206. Of course, at the opposite end of the spectrum are those who either entirely or largely reject the testimony of Acts and instead seek to construct a Pauline chronology entirely from his letters; see, especially Charles H. Buck and Greer Taylor, Saint Paul: A Study of the Development of His Thought (New York: Scribner, 1969); John Knox, Chapters in a Life of Paul (Rev. ed; Macon, Ga: Mercer University Press, 1987); Gerd Lüdemann, Paul, Apostle to the Gentiles: Studies in Chronology (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984); Niels Hyldahl, Die paulinische Chronologie (ATDan 19; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1986). For an excellent survey of research on the use of the Acts material in con-

Paul’s Reading of Isaiah within Second Temple Judaism

19

of Isaiah was situated within a context in which various strands of Second Temple Judaism (STJ) appropriated Isaiah and saw within his prophecies a word from God that addressed their current experiences. The frequent appropriation of Isaiah by various strands of STJ reveals the significance of Isaiah during the centuries preceding the birth of Jesus.72 For example, a quick glance at the scripture index 73 of the two-volume collection of the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha 74 reveals that Isaiah was one of the most cited books of the Old Testament. 75 Although dating from later than the first century, the Rabbinic materials (i.e., the Talmud, Mishnah, Tosefta, and especially the Targums) 76 also contain interpretive and exegetical traditions that extend back before the time of Paul, and as such provide a useful source of comparison and contrast. Outside the early Christian movement, the abundant references to Isaiah within the Qumran documents are most significant. In addition to the copies of the text itself,77 fragments of pesharim on se-

72 73 74 75

76

77

structing a Pauline chronology, see Rainer Riesner, Paul's Early Period: Chronology, Mission Strategy, Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 1-28. Why Isaiah was so important during this period likely stems from the vision of God’s eschatological salvation and the resulting restoration of Israel that it so vividly portrays. Steve Delamarter, A Scripture Index to Charlesworth's The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (London: Sheffield Academic, 2002). James H. Charlesworth, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (New York: Doubleday, 1983-1985). From the documents in volume one, only Genesis is cited or alluded to more frequently than Isaiah. In the second volume, which includes “expansions” of various canonical texts, Isaianic citations are less prominent, but still exhibit a significant presence. Dating the traditions within the Targums remains a difficult and necessarily speculative task, but the presence of targumic texts at Qumran (4Q156 [Leviticus], 4Q157 [Job], 11Q10 [Job]) reveals the existence of such a practice in Paul’s day. For general introductions to the Isaiah Targum, see Bruce D. Chilton, The Isaiah Targum: Introduction, Translation, Apparatus and Notes (ArBib 11; Wilmington, DE: Glazier, 1987); Moshe Goshen-Gottstein, ed., The Book of Isaiah (Hebrew University Bible; Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1995); for treatment of the theology of the Isaiah Targum, see Bruce D. Chilton, The Glory of Israel: The Theology and Provenience of the Isaiah Targum (JSOTSup 23; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1983); for comparison with the LXX, see L H. Brockington, "Septuagint and Targum," ZAW 66 (1954): 80-86; for comparison to the Peshitta, see Elwyn R. Rowlands, "Targum and the Peshitta Version of the Book of Isaiah," VT 9 (1959): 178-91. These would be 1QIsaa, 1Q8, 4Q55, 4Q56, 4Q57, 4Q58, 4Q59, 4Q60, 4Q61, 4Q62, 4Q62a, 4Q63, 4Q64, 4Q65, 4Q66, 4Q67, 4Q68, 4Q69, 4Q69a, 4Q69b, 5Q3, and Mur 3. Understandably, most of the scholarly attention has focused on 1QIsa a; see, e.g., Edward Y. Kutscher, Language and Linguistic Background of the Isaiah Scroll (1QIsaa) (STDJ 6; Leiden : Brill, 1974); Paulson Pulikottil, Transmission of Biblical Texts in Qumran: The Case of the Large Isaiah Scroll 1QIsaa (JSPSup 34; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2001). On the relationship between 1QIsa a and the LXX of Isaiah, see Joseph Ziegler, "Die Vorlage der Isaias-LXX und die erste Isaias-Rolle von Qumran (1 Q Isa)," JBL 78 (1959): 34-59; Arie van der Kooij, "The Old Greek of Isaiah in Relation to the Qumran

20


lected Isaianic texts have also been discovered.78 More noteworthy, however, are the frequent citations and allusions to Isaiah that occur in the non-biblical writings,79 often at key points that reveal aspects of the Qumran community’s self-understanding.80 Great caution, however, needs to be used when comparing the use of Isaiah in the broader literature of STJ and Paul. There is a great difference between parallels and influence;81 the former merely identifies that two distinct entities share enough similar features to invite comparison, while the latter posits a dependent relationship between the two. As such, demonstrating influence requires a much higher standard of proof. This study will, where helpful, seek to draw in parallels from STJ texts that appropriate the same Isaianic text that Paul used in Galatians.82 These parallels are used to illustrate how other strands of Second Temple Judaism appropriated these Isaianic texts. While each example must be evaluated individually, generally speaking similarities between Paul’s use and that of other Second Temple Jewish texts are evidence of a shared Jewish tradition and not the result of direct literary dependence.83 Given the prominence of Isaiah in Second Temple Jewish texts and the letters of Paul, there can be no doubt that Isaiah’s prophecies were

78

79 80

81 82

83

Texts of Isaiah: Some General Comments," in Septuagint, Scrolls and Cognate Writings (ed. Brooke G. J. and Barnabas Lindars; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1992), 11-47. These pesharim fragments are found in 3Q4, 4Q161-65. The Isaianic texts commented on are 5:10-14, 24-25 (4Q162), 10:28-11:3 (4Q161), 30:15-20 (4Q163), and 54:11-12 (4Q164). The fragment of 3Q4 is a commentary on Isa 1:1, but no continuous text has been preserved; 4Q165 is too damaged to be deciphered. Unfortunately, no comprehensive listing of citations (let alone allusions and echoes) exists for the Qumran materials; one can only hope that someone will take up the task. For example, in the Manual of Discipline (1QS 8:13-16), the members of the community are described as those who “go into the wilderness to prepare there the way” for the Lord. This description is immediately followed by a citation of Isa 40:3; for discussion of this text in the self-understanding of the Qumran community, see George J. Brooke, "Isaiah 40:3 and the Wilderness Community," in New Qumran Texts and Studies: New Qumran Texts and Studies (ed. George J. Brooks and Florentino Martinez; Leiden: Brill, 1994), 117-32. The classic statement of this danger is Samuel Sandmel, "Parrallelomania," JBL 81 (1962): 1-13. No claim is made in this study to provide a robust comparison between Paul’s use of certain Isaianic texts and that found in other Second Temple Jewish texts; such a task would require its own inquiry. Thus, only those examples from Second Temple Jewish texts that shed light on Paul’s use of the same Isaianic text will be included. This does not preclude the possibility of literary dependence, but rather an acknowledgment of the tremendous difficulty in building a persuasive case for the probability of such dependence.

Paul’s Access to Isaiah’s Prophecies

21

accessible. The question remains, however, as to the form in which Paul encountered Isaiah.

1.4 Paul’s Access to Isaiah’s Prophecies Paul’s Access to Isaiah’s Prophecies Scholars remain divided on the nature of Paul’s access to Isaiah. Broadly speaking, three main tracks must be considered.

1.4.1 Memorization If in fact Paul was a Pharisee trained under the tutelage of Gamaliel (Acts 22:3), there can be little doubt that memorizing scripture was part of his education.84 Commenting on his own heritage, Josephus claims that the Mosaic Law enjoins Jewish parents to “Let the children also learn the laws, as the first thing they are taught, which will be the best thing they can be taught, and will be the cause of their future felicity” (Ant. 4:211; cp. Ag. Ap. 2:204). Philo also mentions the importance and priority of teaching the Law to Jewish children (Legat. 115, 210). Even more specific is T. Levi 13:2, where the author exhorts parents “to teach your children letters, that they may have understanding all their life, in order to read the law of God without ceasing.” Additional information about first-century Jewish educational practices can be gleaned from the rabbinic materials. Although they date several centuries later, these writings certainly contain evidence of traditions and practices that date from the time of Paul. At the foundation of Jewish education was the study of Torah.85 The centrality of Torah study was designed to prepare a person for participation in the various aspects of family and community, including the synagogue. A focal point of Jewish education was memorization. Simply learning to read required a disciplined memory, since in this period Hebrew was not 84

85

For two of the more recent and balanced discussions of Paul’s educational background in both the Jewish and Greco-Roman contexts, see W. D. Davies, "Paul from a Jewish Point of View," in The Cambridge History of Judaism III: The Early Roman Period (ed. W. D. Davies, William Horbury, and John Sturdy; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), 678-730, and Andrie B. Du Toit, "A Tale of Two Cities: 'Tarsus or Jerusalem' Revisited," NTS 46 (2000): 375-402. For a helpful overview of the role that Torah study played in Jewish education, see Shemuel Safrai, "Education and Study of the Torah," in The Jewish People in the First Century: Historical Geography, Political History, Social, Cultural and Religious Life and Institutions (ed. Shemuel Safrai and M. Stern; CRINT 2; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987), 945-70.

22


vocalized.86 The emphasis on memorization, however, was not unique to the Jewish people. Within Greco-Roman culture the memorization of key texts ranging from poetry to philosophy to law was also foundational in the educational process.87 Therefore, whether Paul’s education is considered to be Jewish or Greco-Roman or some combination of the two, we can be confident that he memorized significant portions of scripture as part of his formal training and personal study. 88 The significance of this fact for the study of Paul’s use of scripture, however, remains disputed. Scholars of a previous generation appealed to “memory lapses” to explain Paul’s divergence from the exact wording of the biblical text. 89 After all, the practical difficulty of looking up verses from different scrolls (none of which had modern day chapter and verse divisions) indicates at least the possibility, if not the likelihood, that Paul relied on his memory for scriptural references.90 Such an argument is a two-edged sword however; the more lapses in memory one finds the more one has to question the reliability of that memorization. Furthermore, the studies of Koch and Stanley have persuasively 86 87

88 89

90

Ibid., 950. The extent and significance of memorization in the ancient world remains a debated subject; however, there is ample evidence from the Greco-Roman period that memorization played a role in education; see, e.g., David M. Carr, Writing on the Tablet of the Heart: Origins of Scripture and Literature (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 96-101; Whitney T. Shiner, Proclaiming the Gospel: First-Century Performance of Mark (Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 2003), 103-24; Allan R. Millard, Reading and Writing in the Time of Jesus (New York: New York University Press, 2000),192-94; Jocelyn P. Small, Wax Tablets of the Mind: Cognitive Studies of Memory and Literacy in Classical Antiquity (London and New York: Routledge, 1997), 81-137; Harry Y. Gamble, Books and Readers in the Early Church: A History of Early Christian Texts (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1995), 28-32; William V. Harris, Ancient Literacy (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1989), 30-33; Birger Gerhardsson, Memory and Manuscript: Oral Tradition and Written Transmission in Rabbinic Judaism and Early Christianity (ASNU XXII; Lund: C.W.K Gleerup, 1961), 124-26. What should not be missed is the relationship between written texts and memorization in which the former were regarded as an aid to the latter. Carr (Writing on the Tablet, 98) concludes that “writing in Ancient Greece was linked from an early point to the tradition of recitation of poetry, serving as a secondary support for readers who already knew the poetry well. Training in writing simply allowed such reader-reciters to use textual helps in memorization, review and accurate recitation.” Wagner (Heralds of the Good News, 21-22 n. 80) notes that Paul’s background as a Pharisee raised within the diaspora further suggests extensive engagement with the scriptures in Greek. See, e.g., the following: Ellis, Paul’s Use of the Old Testament, 14-15; Lindars, New Testament Apologetic, 26-27; and Hanson, Studies in Paul’s Technique, 148. The challenge of exact wording would have been further complicated by the likelihood that he had memorized portions of scripture in both Hebrew and Greek, a difficulty noted by Ellis that often remains unmentioned. For a particularly strong assertion of this claim, see Michel, Paulus und seine Bibel, 8087.


23

shown that Paul often intentionally alters the wording of the scriptural text for his own purposes.91 Given the state of the available evidence, we simply cannot conclude with any certainty the role that memory played in Paul’s encounter with scripture. On the whole, we regard it as probable that Paul had significant portions of the OT committed to memory; which passages and in what language(s) those passages were memorized remains impossible to conclude with any confidence.92

1.4.2 Testimonia The practical difficulties of Paul carrying numerous scrolls of scriptural texts with him during his extensive travels have led some scholars to posit the possibility that Paul carried with him a listing of biblical texts organized by theme.93 The origins of this suggestion, frequently referred to as the Testimonia Hypothesis, are generally attributed to Edwin Hatch,94 though precursors can be found nearly sixty years earlier.95 Arguing from parallels in the broader Greco-Roman culture, Hatch concluded that the early Christians compiled manuals containing excerpts of scripture for purposes ranging from worship to polemics and points in between. Nearly thirty years later J. Rendel Harris 96 furthered developed Hatch’s proposal by arguing for the existence of a single written Testimony Book that contained scriptural passages categorized by subject and included editorial comments. Since that time various scholars have shaped and altered the Testimonia Hypothesis, and the

91

92

93 94 95 96

See Koch, Schrift als Zeuge, 93-99, and Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture, 1728, 67-79. As Wagner (Heralds of the Good News, 22-26) has pointed out, Paul’s intentional alteration of scriptural wording does not require that Paul worked only (or even primarily) with written texts, since “[d]eliberate modifications may be made to memorized texts as well as to written ones” (23). Wagner (Heralds of the Good News, 22 n. 82, 24 n. 86) raises the possibility that Paul had memorized Isaiah in Greek. While such a proposal is attractive, there is simply not enough evidence to effectively evaluate such a claim. Consequently, Wagner’s hypothesis must remain extremely tentative, as he himself admits. For the various forms this hypothesis has taken, see the excellent overview in Martin C. Albl, And Scripture Cannot Be Broken: The Form and Function of the Early Christian Testimonia Collections (NovTSup 96; Leiden: Brill, 1999), 7-69. Edwin Hatch, “On Early Quotations from the Septuagint” and “On Composite Quotations from the Septuagint” in Essays in Biblical Greek (Oxford: Clarendon, 1889), 131-214. Albl (Scripture Cannot be Broken, 9-10) identifies Johann C. K. Döpke, Hermeneutik der neutestamentlichen Schriftsteller (Leipzig: Vogel, 1829), 417-38 and Karl A. Credner, Beiträge zur Einleitung in die biblischen Schriften (Halle: Waisenhaus, 1838), 318-28. J. Rendel Harris, Testimonies (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1916).

24


discovery of 4QTestimonia at Qumran has shown that such collections did in fact exist in at least one strand of STJ.97 Whether the NT authors actually compiled or used such written compilations of OT texts, however, remains far from established. At present, no direct evidence of such a collection used by Christians exists before the third century, though “the presence of authoritative nonstandard quotations found in various strands of the NT” certainly establishes the possibility that the early church compiled testimonia. 98 Also worth consideration are the proposals of C.H. Dodd and Barnabas Lindars, who argue for a broader oral tradition that the NT authors drew upon in explaining the significance of Jesus. 99 Rather than a standard written list of “proof-texts” culled from the OT, the early Christians instead appear to have identified key portions of scripture that illuminated the meaning of Jesus’ ministry, death, resurrection, and exaltation.100 Whether these key portions of scripture were ever written out and distributed for use in the worship and proclamation of the early church remains difficult to determine with any level of certainty. 101 We should not, however, rule out the possibility that Paul had his own notebook collection of scriptural excerpts. 102 As he moved from town to town on his missionary travels proclaiming Christ in the synagogues, Paul often would have had access to scrolls of scripture. In the course of his ongoing reflection on Jesus as the fulfillment of the OT promises, and the church as the eschatological people of God, Paul may have either copied key portions of scripture into a personal notebook or 97

For a discussion of the significance of 4QTestimonia and the Testimonia Hypothesis, see Joseph A. Fitzmyer, "'4QTestimonia' and the New Testament," TS 18 (1957): 51337. 98 So Albl, Scripture Cannot be Broken, 286-87. Although Albl’s claim of the virtual certainty of existence of written testimonia is overstated, he has solidly grounded the possibility, if not the probability, that such collections existed. 99 Dodd, According to the Scriptures, 28-60, and Lindars, New Testament Apologetic, 13-31. For Dodd, the kerygma was the starting point for the early church in its use of scripture, while Lindars began with the need to defend a crucified Messiah in apologetic encounters with Jewish opponents. 100 While it cannot be demonstrated with certainty, the identification of at least some of these key passages may be traceable to Jesus himself (cf. Luke 24:44-49). 101 Albl (Scripture Cannot be Broken, 286) cites the following as possible forms of testimonia: proof-text collections, dialogues, eschatological discourses, historical reviews, and narratives about Jesus. His confident assertion that Paul was familiar with some form of these written testimonia is possible, but far from certain. 102 For an excellent study of reading and writing in Paul’s day, see Millard, Reading and Writing; on the use of notebooks containing excerpts for later use, see Koch, Schrift als Zeuge, 247-55; Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture, 69-79; Gamble, Books and Readers, 24-28; Lim, Holy Scripture, 150-58; Albl, Scripture Cannot be Broken, 79-81; E. R. Richards, Paul and First-Century Letter Writing: Secretaries, Composition, and Collection (Downers Grove: IVP, 2004), 54-58.


25

delegated the task to one of his associates. It is also possible that a wealthy convert of Paul’s ministry could have commissioned and funded the production of scriptural scrolls for Paul and his congregations to use.103

1.4.3 Text Regardless of one’s conclusion on the importance of memorization and the possibility of a testimonia list, no one doubts that Paul had access to written copies of scripture at least occasionally, if not frequently. Determining the form of that text, however, is not an easy task. Given the probability that Paul knew Hebrew and Aramaic in addition to Greek, he could have conceivably read scripture in any of these three languages. The fact that Paul’s use of scripture occurs in letters written in Greek to Christian communities throughout the Mediterranean does not automatically eliminate the possibility that Paul read and studied scripture in Hebrew, since it is conceivable that he simply renders his own translation from Hebrew to Greek. The recent studies of Koch, Stanley, and Silva, however, persuasively show that Paul’s citations and allusions are generally “septuagintal” in character.104 In the effort to reconstruct the text form(s) Paul used, 105 this study will use the critically reconstructed text of LXX Isaiah, 106 with careful 103 The possibility that Paul owned personal copies of biblical scrolls was suggested by both Michel (Paulus und seine Bibel, 123) and Ellis (Paul’s Use of the Old Testament, 19 n. 5). 104 Koch, Schrift als Zeuge, 48-88; Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture, 254-55; Silva, “Old Testament in Paul,” 630-33. Having said this, it must be acknowledged that what is commonly referred to as the LXX may not always reflect the Greek text that Paul used. The initial translations of the Hebrew texts took place in the first and second centuries B.C.E., and experienced not only the effects of copying, but also intentional revisions before the text “stabilized” around the third or fourth century C.E. See Sidney Jellicoe, The Septuagint and Modern Study (Oxford: Clarendon, 1968), 74-99; Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture, 37-51; Karen H. Jobes and Moisés Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000), 29-68; Natalio F. Marcos, The Septuagint in Context: Introduction to the Greek Version of the Bible (Boston: Brill Academic, 2001), 35-152. The fluid nature of the Greek texts of the OT circulating in the first century warrants caution in postulating the exact wording of the text(s) that Paul used. 105 While we cannot reproduce Paul’s text-form(s) with exact precision at every point, the available tools permit a reliably close approximation. In what follows I am largely following the approach of Wagner, Heralds, 15-19. For discussion of the relationship between the versions of Aquila, Theodotion and Symmachus, see Marcos, Septuagint in Context, 21-152. For discussion of the availability of Isaiah LXX in the first century, its relationship to the translations of Aquila, Theodotion and Symmachus and evidence of influence from Jewish exegetical tradition, see the concise summary

26


attention paid to the critical apparatus for variant readings within the broader LXX manuscript tradition. Further comparison will be made with other citations, allusions and echoes in the rest of the NT. In addition, reference will be made to the Hebrew and Aramaic forms of the text, with special emphasis on the MT, Qumran writings and the Isaiah Targum.

1.4.4 Conclusion How then did Paul encounter the book of Isaiah? While not doubting the strong possibility that Paul had at least portions of the OT memorized, the available evidence suggests that his exposure to Isaiah was primarily textual in nature. Paul may have possessed his own scroll(s) of Isaiah (as well as other key OT passages) or he (or an associate) copied extracts into private notebooks as opportunities arose. In either case, as he continually reflected on scripture in light of the Christ-event, and reflected on the Christ-event in light of scripture, Paul would have naturally gravitated to passages that illuminated various elements of his gospel message. To this point we have surveyed the relevant literature, highlighted the importance of situating Paul’s reading of Isaiah within his historical and cultural context, and explored the form in which Paul encountered the book of Isaiah. All that remains is to lay out the methodological approach of the present study.

1.5 Methodology Methodology In any study pursuing the influence of the OT in the NT, methodological questions are extremely important. Despite this, however, a number of studies either ignore or effectively gloss over such concerns. 107 Failand bibliographical references in Gregory K. Beale, "The Old Testament Background of Rev 3.14," NTS 42 (1996): 133-52, esp. 139-40 n. 24. 106 Joseph Ziegler, ed., Isaias (3d ed., 1983; Vetus Testamentum Graecum Auctoritate Academie Scientiarum Gottingensis Editum 14; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1939). Also significant is the study of Isaac L. Seeligmann, The Septuagint Version of Isaiah: A Discussion of its Problems (Leiden: Brill, 1948), as well as the recent collection of essays in Isaac L. Seeligmann, Robert Hanhart, and Hermann Spieckermann, ed., The Septuagint Version of Isaiah and Cognate Studies (FAT 40; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004). 107 This concern is helpfully raised by Stanley E. Porter, "The Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament: A Brief Comment on Method and Terminology," in Early

Methodology

27

ure to define the terms and criteria used has produced divergent conclusions and made comparing the results of different scholars difficult. As a result, broad consensus on the extent to which Paul used the OT, not to mention the significance of the OT for Paul’s understanding and presentation of the gospel, remains elusive. This study does not claim to offer the definitive statement of terms and criteria; however, we will strive for precision by defining key terms and establishing the criteria employed in making critical judgments.108

1.5.1 The Methodology of this Study By using the broad category of influence,109 we can explore links between the two texts that may not rest on shared words or phrases, but on shared themes, structure, sequence, and underlying narrative. Scripture functioned as more than a source of proof-texts for Paul’s theological and pastoral argumentation.110 Paul viewed Scripture as a multiChristian Interpretation of the Scriptures of Israel: Investigations and Proposals (ed. Craig A. Evans and James A. Sanders; JSNT 148/ SSEJC 5 Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997), 79-96. For an excellent survey of scholarship on intertextuality with an emphasis on its application in Pauline studies, see Wakefield, Where to Live, 57-96. Our discussion here is indebted to Christopher A. Beetham, Echoes of Scripture in the Letter of Paul to the Colossians (BIS 96; Leiden & Boston: Brill, 2008), 11-40 and shares similarities with Benjamin L. Gladd, Revealing the Mysterion: The Use of Mystery in Daniel and Second Temple Judaism with Its Bearing on First Corinthians (BZNW 160; Berlin: deGruyter, 2008), 2-6. Stanley E. Porter, "The Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament: A Brief Comment on Method and Terminology," in Early Christian Interpretation of the Scriptures of Israel : Investigations and Proposals, ed. Craig A. Evans and James A. Sanders, (Sheffield, Eng. : Sheffield Academic Press, 1997), 79-96. Stanley E. Porter. "The Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament: A Brief Comment on Method and Terminology," in Early Christian Interpretation of the Scriptures of Israel: Investigations and Proposals, ed. Craig A. Evans and James A. Sanders, (Sheffield, Eng.: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997), 79-96. 108 While precision is a goal of this study, one must keep in mind that we are speaking of the relationship between texts. Consequently, there is an inherent ambiguity in the task itself that cannot be reduced to scientific precision. Additionally, since the relationship between two texts may be revealed in ways other than explicitly shared vocabulary, a cumulative case must be built when arguing for the presence of influence. By their very nature, cumulative case arguments involve a diversity of evidence, as well as critical judgments regarding the importance of that evidence. It is therefore to be expected that scholars will differ in their conclusions. On this subject, see further G.K. Beale We Become What Worship: A Biblical Theology of Idolatry (Downers Grove: IVP, 2008), 22-35. 109 For a helpful discussion of this larger category of influence, see Roy E. Ciampa, “Scriptural Language and Ideas,” in As It is Written, 41-57. 110 See, for example, Adolf von Harnack, "Das Alte Testament in den paulinischen Briefen und in den paulinischen Gemeinden," in Kleine Schriften zur alten Kirche: Berliner Akademieschriften (Adolf von Harnack and Jürgen Dummer; Leipzig:

28


faceted tapestry that tells the grand story of God’s creation of the world and the redemption of his people which has now climaxed in the death, resurrection, and exaltation of Jesus Christ. Scripture formed the very framework for Paul’s conceptual world, shaping his understanding of himself, Jesus, the people of God, and the world. As such, determining OT influence within a specific text requires allowing for a relationship between the two texts that transcends shared vocabulary.111 1.5.1.1 Terminology Under the concept of influence, we will use four categories: citation,112 allusion,113 echo and thematic parallel. Although distinguishing between these categories has some value, such distinctions must not be considered sharp. Instead, they are part of a spectrum that runs from an explicit citation at one end to a thematic parallel at the other, with allusion and echo somewhere in between (see Figure 1). 114 Citation

Allusion

Echo Thematic Parallel

Figure 1

111 112

113

114

Zentralantiquariat der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik, 1980), 823-41 and Beker, “Echoes,” 64-69. For a study that also takes into account intertextual relationships that transcend shared vocabulary and incorporates thematic/conceptual parallels, see Ciampa, Presence and Function, 20-33. In this study we will use the terms citation and quotation interchangeably. Some distinguish even further between formal and informal quotations, the difference being the presence of a quotation formula; see, e.g., Koch, Schrift als Zeuge, 11-23; Fekkes, Isaiah and Prophetic Traditions, 63-64; Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture, 37. It should be noted that such difficulties are not limited to the NT; for discussion of the complexity of quotations within the OT itself, see Richard L. Schultz, The Search for Quotation: Verbal Parallels in the Prophets (JSOTSup 180; Sheffield: Sheffield Press, 1999), 210-39, 330-38. Because the only Isaianic citation in Galatians (54:1 in 4:27) contains an introductory formula, such distinctions are unnecessary in this inquiry. Attempting to define the term allusion is challenging; among the more helpful discussions are Udo J. Hebel, Intertextuality, Allusion, and Quotation: An International Bibliography of Critical Studies (BIWL 18; New York: Greenwood Press, 1989), 5-8; Michael B. Thompson, Clothed with Christ: The Example and Teaching of Jesus in Romans 12:1–15:13 (JSNTSup 59; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991), 28-36; Porter, “Use of the Old Testament,” 79-96; idem., “Further Comments on the Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament,” in The Intertextuality of the Epistles: Explorations of Theory and Practice (ed. Thomas L. Brodie, Dennis R. MacDonald, and Stanley E. Porter; NTM 16; Sheffield: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2007), 98-110; idem., “Allusions and Echoes,” in As It is Written, 29-40. In this respect my proposal is similar to that of Hays, Echoes, 23-24.

Methodology

29

The distinction among them lies primarily in the amounts of shared vocabulary and/or syntactical patterns; the greater the amount of shared vocabulary, the closer one is to citation. An even finer distinction exists between the terms allusion and echo, with the latter referring to a more subtle appropriation of scripture. Drawing upon insights from the study of intertextuality, 115 an additional difference between allusion and echo is intentionality; allusions (along with citations) are intentional references by the author, while echoes are such subtle appropriations of scripture that intentionality is often extremely difficult to determine. 116 But in order for a fuller picture of the extent and significance of Isaianic influence in Galatians, we must not allow the question of intentionality to unduly hinder our investigation. The category of echo allows for the possibility that the influence of a previous text is so pervasive upon an author that its influence may be present even when the author does not necessarily intend the audience to see the connection.117 Given the difficulty of determin-

115 While it is true that the pioneers in the study of intertextuality such as Roland Barthes and Julia Kristeva worked within a post-structuralist framework, the use of these literary-critical tools does not demand such a framework. As Richard Hays has argued, “the literary-critical operation of tracing the meaning-effects created by Paul’s intertextual figurations is in principle neutral with regard to metatheories about language and truth” (“On The Rebound,” 79-81; quote taken from 80). 116 For this distinction as the dividing line between allusion and echo, see, e.g., Sylvia C. Keesmaat, Paul and His Story: (Re)-Interpreting the Exodus Tradition (JSNTSup 181; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999), 48-52. As she notes, the term intertextuality was initially used by scholars to emphasize the unintentional nature of the relationship between texts, but others have rightly begun to highlight intentional intertextual relationships; see, e.g., Thaïs E. Morgan, "Is There an Intertext in this Text? Literary and Interdisciplinary Approaches to Intertextuality," American Journal of Semiotics 3 (1985): 1-40, and Boyarin, Intertextuality and the Reading of Midrash, 12-19. Perhaps most succinct is the claim of Hollander (Figure of Echo, 64) — “in contrast with literary allusion, echo is a metaphor of, and for, alluding, and does not depend on conscious intention” (cited in Beetham, Echoes of Scripture, 21). For a succinct summary of the role that intentionality plays in discussion of allusions and echoes, see Porter, “Allusions and Echoes,” 34-36. 117 At this point the observation of Perri concerning echoes may prove helpful — “such subtle incorporations of markers may appear to be for the poet himself, something we ‘overhear’, thereby contributing to a quality of lyrical privacy”; see Carmela Perri, "On Alluding," Poetics 7 (1978): 289-307, quote from 304, cited in Beetham, Echoes of Scripture, 21. Shortly after citing Perri, Beetham goes on to helpfully observe “a reader with a deep familiarity of the texts read by the author may overhear the author’s otherwise private ‘flashes in the brainpan’ with their well-attuned ear. Echoes surface in a text largely because the author’s mind is saturated with the source text. For the apostle Paul, the sacred Scriptures of Israel constituted such a source text” (idem.).

30


ing intentionality, some cases of Isaianic influence may not be easily labeled allusion or echo, but this is to be expected when dealing with the relationship between two texts. Identifying the presence of influence and its significance does not necessarily depend on the ability to determine the intentionality of the reference. When we move to the category of thematic parallel, we have crossed a bridge of sorts.118 The main dividing line is that whereas citation, allusion and echo are literary categories based on shared vocabulary, thematic parallels work on the conceptual level. In his helpful discussion of literary parallels in poetry, Richard D. Altick contends that a parallel implies that neither internal nor external evidence is strong enough to make us confident that y derives from x. While certain features of poem y are indeed found in x, they occur fairly often in preceding or concurrent literature, and the fact that they are found in y may equally well—in the absence of more specific indications—be due to antecedents floating at large in the nebulous realm of literary tradition or intellectual milieu.119

Thus with thematic parallels we are dealing with ideas/concepts shared between texts that transcend precise verbal relationships. 120 In such cases it is often difficult to determine whether the shared thematic parallels originate from a specific text or are instead part of the larger shared scriptural background that shaped the very conceptual framework of Paul.121

118 Our discussion of thematic parallels is heavily indebted to Beetham, Echoes of Scripture, 24-27 and Ciampa, “Scriptural Language,” 41-57. 119 Richard D. Altick and John J. Fenstermaker, The Art of Literary Research (4th ed.; New York & London: W.W. Norton, 1992), 110-11, cited in Beetham, Echoes of Scripture, 24. 120 Some scholars have made further distinctions between type of parallels; see, e.g., T. L. Donaldson, “Parallels: Use, Misuse and Limitations,” EvQ 55 (1983): 193-210. He distinguishes between analogical and genealogical parallels. Analogical parallels arise out of universal human experience, whereas genealogical ones reveal an organic relationship between a specific text or tradition. While such differences can be helpful to identify, they are unnecessary for this study. For further discussion of Donaldson’s categories, see Beetham, Echoes of Scripture, 25-27. 121 In this study, as a general rule thematic parallels play a supportive role to proposed allusions or echoes to raise the possibility that not only have specific passages of Isaiah influenced portions of Galatians, but larger themes and motifs as well. See further Ciampa, “Scriptural Language,” 48-49, who argues that such parallels play a supportive role to citations, allusions and echoes.

Methodology

31

1.5.1.2 Criteria for Detecting Influence In terms of criteria for determining the presence of Isaianic influence, this study uses a two-tiered approach. The first tier of criteria identifies the features of the text itself that indicate the presence of influence, while the second tier of criteria regulates how the textual data identified in the first tier should be evaluated in determining the validity of the proposed influence. The First Tier With respect to the first tier of textual criteria, three categories of textual data must be considered. The first, and most obvious, is that of vocabulary and syntax. The greater the amount of shared vocabulary that exists between a text in Isaiah and a passage in Galatians, the more likely that influence is indeed present. The span of text in which this shared vocabulary exists must be taken into account as well; the more shared vocabulary there is within a shorter span of text the more likely that influence is in fact present. The mere sharing of words by itself, however, does not automatically indicate influence. Thus, the significance and frequency of the shared vocabulary must be considered as well. Furthermore, the inclusion of syntax within this category enables us to identify similarities between texts even when the exact wording does not match.122 The second category is that of structure/sequence. This category is related but ultimately distinct from the previous. When it can be demonstrated that a similar sequence of ideas and/or (underlying) narrative structure is present within the two texts, influence may in fact be present.123 Larger amounts of text are generally needed to identify this type of influence. Third is thematic/conceptual. When it can be demonstrated that a similar theme or concept is developed in an ana122 For example, as will be argued below (87-89), Paul’s claim in Gal 1:24 that the churches of Judea “were glorifying God in me” (evdo,xazon evn evmoi. to.n qeo,n) is an echo of Isa 49:3, where Yahweh says to the servant, “you are my servant, Israel, and in you I will be glorified” (dou/lo,j mou ei= su, Israhl kai. evn soi. doxasqh,somai). Paul has appropriated this passage to describe his unique role within salvation history, and as a result has changed the pronoun from soi, in Isa 49:3 to evmoi, in Gal 1:24. 123 For helpful discussion and examples of this kind of usage of the OT, see G. K. Beale, The Use of Daniel in Jewish Apocalyptic Literature and in the Revelation of St. John (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1984), 178-203, 313-20 and G. K. Beale, John's Use of the Old Testament in Revelation (JSNTSup 166; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1998), 75-126. As an example of this kind of use of the OT, Beale argues that “Daniel 7:9ff. is the model behind the [Revelation] 4-5 vision because of the same basic structure of common ideas and images, which is supplemented by numerous phrases having varying degrees of allusion to the text of Daniel” (Use of Daniel, 222-23).

32


logous fashion, influence may be present. Allowance must be made for eschatological development (i.e., place within the unfolding of redemptive history), as well as for the claim (stated or unstated) of fulfillment.124 The Second Tier The second tier of criteria, which are used to evaluate the textual data discovered in the first tier, consists of five considerations.125 The first of these is volume; at issue here is the extent to which the textual data are present. Consequently, this is both quantitative (how much textual data are present?) and qualitative (what is the prominence of that textual data?). Second is recurrence, which explores whether or not the same Isaianic text is used elsewhere. Primary consideration is to be given to Paul’s other writings, but other occurrences within the NT should not be excluded. The use and interpretation of the same Isaianic text in Second Temple Jewish texts will also be considered whenever relevant as a means of comparing and contrasting Paul’s use.126 Coherence is the third consideration. Does the proposed influence cohere with the broader context of Paul’s argument? Allowance must be made for Paul’s fundamentally gospel-centered hermeneutic, which serves as his filter for reading the OT.127 The next consideration is recognition by others: have others in the history of interpretation noticed such influence? Caution must be exercised, since it is possible for an interpreter to discover influence where it had not been previously perceived. At the same 124 For example, in Isaiah 51:1-8 the prophet develops the theme of the revelation of God’s righteousness that brings salvation and justice not only for Israel but for the nations as well. All of this is rooted in the Abrahamic covenant. In a similar vein, in Romans 3:21–4:25, Paul develops the theme of God’s righteouness being revealed in the propitiatory death of Jesus, resulting in salvation to both Jew and Gentile alike while satisfying his own justice. This too is rooted in the Abrahamic covenant. 125 These are adapted from Hays, Echoes, 29-32. For a similar adaptation of Hays’s approach, see Wagner, Heralds, 11-13. 126 See §1.3 above. 127 In other words, when Paul read the OT, he did so through the lenses of the gospel, which relates the story of God working out his redemptive purposes for his rebellious creation in fulfillment of his promises to Israel. The fulfillment of these promises has culminated in the death, resurrection, and exaltation of Jesus the Messiah, and resulted in the formation of the eschatological people of God who await his return and the subsequent consummation of God’s redemptive plan. When framed in this manner, the various ways Paul interprets and appropriates scripture can be understood, while recognizing that individual examples will inevitably emphasize one aspect of this broader narrative. Yet even when one aspect receives emphasis, it must always be understood against the backdrop of this larger gospel narrative, lest it be distorted.

Methodology

33

time, recognition by others does strengthen the claim of influence and should be acknowledged. Finally, the explanatory power of the proposed instance of influence must be evaluated. In other words, does the proposed influence shed light on Paul’s argument within its context? Can it illuminate aspects of the text that are otherwise unclear or disputed? These two tiers of criteria are implicit throughout this study, even in places where they are not explicitly mentioned. To detail each of these steps for every proposed allusion or echo would seriously weary the reader and is unnecessary for our study.128 As we explore the possibility of a proposed allusion or echo, we will indicate, where helpful, how the criteria inform our conclusions. With respect to the use of the terms allusion and echo, we will use allusion to refer to examples of influence that have more substantive support from the two tiers, while reserving echo for those cases where the evaluative criteria provide less reason to be confident that Isaianic influence is present. Again, however, we must stress that it is often difficult to sharply distinguish between an allusion and echo, and at times our decision to label a specific example of Isaianic influence as an allusion or echo will be tentative. Those cases where influence is based on conceptual grounds and cannot be assigned distinctively to Isaiah will be categorized as thematic parallels. But it must be stressed that these categories are at best heuristic labels for describing various levels of influence. We should also note that inevitably in this study, some proposed allusions and echoes will seem probable, others possible, and still others unlikely. This reality is to be expected, given that we are dealing with the relationship between texts, not levels of carbon monoxide in a room. Our goal is to examine as many connections between Paul’s argument in Galatians and Isaiah as possible. Inevitably this will mean that some proposed connections will be stronger than others. But the cumulative nature of the argument must be kept in view. Indeed, some individual examples of proposed Isaianic influence may not stand clearly on their own merits. However, when the more faint echoes or thematic parallels are seen in light of the stronger ones they may take on greater probability. So even in cases where an individual example of Isaianic influence is doubtful, the reader is encouraged to keep in view the larger cumulative argument for pervasive Isaianic influence in Galatians.129

128 For a similar approach, see Hays, Echoes, 29-32. 129 For a similar cumulative approach, see Beale, We Become What We Worship, 33-34.

34


1.5.2 Reader Competence Past and Present Given the subtlety of some instances of Isaianic influence, one may legitimately question how many of these scriptural appropriations the original recipients would have recognized. Just as identifying Isaianic influence does not depend on demonstrating intentionality on the part of the author, the ability of the audience to perceive Isaianic influence does not determine the plausibility of such influence. 130 Recognizing citations would not have required much from the recipients, since they were often accompanied by some type of introductory formula. But since there is only one explicit citation of Isaiah in Galatians, the question remains as to how many of the allusions and echoes the Galatians would have recognized. While we cannot be certain, two considerations make it likely that the Galatians would have perceived a number of the connections.131 First, Paul assumes familiarity with the OT when writing to his communities.132 Every one of his letters contains strong allusions if not explicit citations of OT texts, regardless of the ethnic makeup of the recipients. If, as it seems likely, a number of Paul’s converts were Godfearing Gentiles, they would have been exposed to the reading and teaching of the OT during worship in the synagogue. Furthermore, if the content of Paul’s proclamation in the synagogue is even remotely similar to that of Acts 13:16-41, we can observe that his teaching ministry involved a significant element of explaining how Jesus was the fulfillment of the Jewish scriptures. The probability that at least some liturgical practices of the early church were adopted from the synagogue further suggests the importance of the public reading and teaching of scripture.133 Naturally, the familiarity each person had with the scriptures will have varied substantially, but there is no reason to assume that Paul aimed for the lowest common denominator in his use of scripture.134 130 This study is interested in the influence of Isaiah on Paul as evidenced in his letter to the Galatians, and must allow for the distinct possibility that Paul’s audience may have missed these more subtle appropriations of scripture. Thus, our study is explicitly author-oriented rather than audience or reader-oriented; for a similar approach, see Beetham, Echoes of Scripture, 12-14. 131 See also the discussion above, 7-8 n. 30. 132 For a concise statement of this claim, see Gamble, Books and Readers, 212-13. 133 Cp. 1 Tim 4:13. For a helpful discussion of the role of scripture reading in both the synagogue and the early church, see Gamble, Books and Readers, 208-31. 134 See Christopher D. Stanley, "'Pearls before Swine': Did Paul's Audiences Understand his Biblical Quotations?," NovT 41 (1999): 124-44 and ibid., Arguing with Scripture, 3861. But as Wagner notes, the fact that Paul’s appropriations of scripture are generally

Methodology

35

The prominence of Scriptural reading and teaching in the early church leads to a second consideration. In addition to the reading of scripture, Paul’s letters were also read, and almost certainly repeatedly.135 Furthermore, Paul’s exhortation in Col 4:16 to read the letter he had written to the Laodiceans indicates that his letters were sometimes read even in churches to which they were not originally addressed. 136 As these letters were read and re-read, more of the OT allusions and echoes would have been recognized. One cannot exclude the possibility that Paul’s appointed courier bore the responsibility of explaining parts of the letter that were not initially clear, including the citations and allusions.137 Finally, part of the responsibility of the teachers within the congregation almost certainly included the explanation and application of apostolic teaching, including Paul’s letters. 138 If neither authorial intent nor the competence of the original recipients can finally determine the plausibility of allusions and echoes, how are we to proceed? The concept of the ideal-reader provides the way forward. The notion of the ideal-reader rests upon determining from the text “those predispositions necessary for a literary work to exercise its effect” and “the network of response inviting structures, which impel the reader to grasp the text.” 139 These predispositions and structures include cultural, historical, literary, and linguistic knowledge/abilities, as well as an intricate web of assumptions necessary for the response called for by the author.140 How closely the actual historical recipients approximated Paul’s ideal reader cannot be easily determined given their varying levels of competence, and the possibility that

135

136 137

138 139 140

presented in a manner that enables a person without a robust biblical literacy to grasp the major thrust is no reason to limit our study to how the least biblically literate would have understood Paul’s scriptural references (Heralds, 34 n. 121). The very fact that Paul’s letters survived and began to be collected in the first century demonstrates that they were considered valuable for Christian doctrine and practice, and as such were likely read repeatedly. See, again, Gamble, Books and Readers, 95101 and Richards, Paul and First-Century Letter Writing, 210-23. If, as many hold, Ephesians is a circular letter, the point is even more firmly established. If the bearer of the letter was expected to supply personal information (cf. Eph 6:2122 and Col 4:7-9), there is no reason why he or she could not have also further explained the contents of the letters. On the role of letter carriers in the ancient world, see Richards, Paul and First-Century Letter Writing, 176-209; M. L. Stirewalt, Paul, the Letter Writer (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 11-18. See Gamble, Books and Readers, 1-10, and Wagner, Heralds, 36-39. Wolfgang Iser, The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1978), 34; cp. Wayne C. Booth, A Rhetoric of Irony (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1974), 228. As such, the modern reader often needs to utilize sources other than the text itself to more closely approximate the ideal reader.

36


Paul misjudged their competence must also be considered. The different elements of the audience complicate such an assessment. Commentators have long recognized that the audience consists at least of Paul’s Galatian converts and his circumcision-promoting opponents. There should be little doubt that Paul’s opponents possessed many of the attributes of the ideal-reader, with perhaps the important exception of some key hermeneutical and theological presuppositions. 141 The picture becomes fuzzier, though, when we consider the competence of Paul’s converts. The letter gives the impression that they were largely a Gentile group who had turned from paganism to Christ (4:8-11), which raises the question of their familiarity with the scriptures. 142 As was probably the case in most of the Pauline communities, the Galatian churches would have been composed of Jewish-Christians, GentileChristians with a background in the synagogue, and Gentile Christians from a pagan background. 143 Within each of these groups there would have been differing levels of familiarity with the OT, as well as various levels of sympathy or antipathy towards Paul and his hermeneutical and theological positions.

1.5.3 Analyzing Paul’s Use of the Old Testament Once we have identified the presence of a citation, allusion, or echo, we must then determine how Paul is using the Isaianic passage hermeneutically and theologically. But rather than attempt to identify the use of each individual example of Isaianic influence, we will as a general rule withhold this analysis until the synthesis portion of each chapter. 144 Hermeneutical. Here we are interested in determining, as best we are able, Paul’s interpretive use of the OT passage. In an investigation of 141 The fundamental hermeneutical difference centers on different readings of salvation history. At the risk of oversimplifying, Paul presents the story of God’s people with the Abrahamic covenant as the controlling framework. This permits him to present Christ as the fulfillment of that covenant, argue that the inclusion of both Jews and Gentiles is based on faith, and relegate the Law to a temporary and supporting role within redemptive history. The theological differences flow from the hermeneutical. 142 Of course, if one holds to a south Galatian provenance, and regards the communities addressed here as those established in Acts 13–14, the picture is further complicated, since several of these communities appear to have sprung from Paul’s evangelistic efforts in the synagogue. 143 The possibility of a fourth group also exists: interested non-Christians of either Jewish or Gentile background who had not yet believed in Christ. Naturally their familiarity with the OT would have varied as well. 144 The major exception to this will be our discussion of the citation of Isa 54:1 in Gal 4:27.

Methodology

37

the use of the OT in Revelation, G.K. Beale has identified eight different ways John uses the OT, ranging from different types of fulfillment to stylistic imitation.145 Admittedly, these different categories of usage cannot always be rigorously distinguished, and we must keep in mind that the demarcation of such categories is a modern attempt to categorize the NT authors’ use of the OT. Paul did not select an OT passage and then consult a list of possible ways to use it. Paul used Scripture within his gospel-centered framework, resulting in a variety of uses for the OT. By exploring the hermeneutical use of the OT passage, we are seeking to identify the bridge between the OT text and Paul’s interpretation/application of it, including but not limited to the underlying assumptions. One particular category warrants special mention: fulfillment. Beale distinguishes between direct and indirect. The difference rests in whether the OT text itself is a verbal prophecy (direct) or whether in and of itself is not but is clearly understood by the NT as prophetic in nature (indirect).146 This indirect fulfillment Beale also calls typological, meaning that the OT prophecy or historical narrative and the NT use share an inherent correspondence, often with the corollary that the OT passage has undergone escalation or universalization.147 Yet despite this helpful distinction, Beale does not explicitly state what exactly he 145 G. K. Beale, John's Use of the Old Testament in Revelation (JSNTSup 166; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1998), 75-126. The eight uses Beale identifies are as follows: (1) OT as literary prototype — an OT passage serves as the model or framework for a NT author’s own composition; (2) Thematic — an OT theme is developed and often expanded; (3) Analogical — an OT person, place or event is placed in a comparative relationship with something in the NT; (4) Universalization — an OT passage limited to a specific entity (often Israel) is expanded to encompass the world; (5) Direct Prophetic Fulfillment — an OT passage, promise, or theme finds its fulfillment in a NT event or person; (6) Indirect Prophetic (Typological) Fulfillment — an OT person, event or text not inherently predictive (such as a historical narrative) finds its fulfillment in a NT event or person; (7) Inverted — an OT passage is reversed, often with intentional irony; (8) Stylistic — OT stylistic patterns are reflected in unusual grammar or syntax. By no means should these categories be regarded as exhaustive; for additional categories, see Fekkes, Isaiah and Prophetic Traditions, 70-103. Because the categories of both Beale and Fekkes arise from a study of Revelation, we must be alert to possible additional categories within Paul, as well as the absence of some of these uses listed here. 146 Ibid., 111-22. An example of direct fulfillment would be Matthew 2:22-24, where the birth of Jesus is said to fulfill the prophetic promise of Isaiah 7:14. An example of indirect fulfillment is found in Matthew 2:14-15, where the departure of the young Jesus from Egypt is said to fulfill Hosea 11:1, which in its original context is not a prophetic promise. 147 Ibid., 116; cp. the understanding of typology in Leonhard Goppelt, Typos: The Typological Interpretation of the Old Testament in the New (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 17-20, 198-205.

38


means by fulfillment. Beale is far from alone in this, however; the term is used ubiquitously but rarely given definition, perhaps since it is assumed to be almost self-evident what is meant by fulfillment. But this is not the case. What then do we mean in this study by fulfillment? We may begin by stating that the word fulfillment indicates “the broad redemptive-historical relationship of the new, climactic revelation of God in Christ to the preparatory, incomplete revelation to and through Israel.”148 In other words, the NT person, event, figure in some measure “fills up” the significance of its OT precursor, often in ways unanticipated by the OT author or original audience(s). 149 This understanding of fulfillment, it must be stressed, does not mean that the NT referent exhausts the significance of its OT precursor; there may yet be further significance to be filled up before the OT precursor reaches its complete and final fulfillment.150

148 Douglas J. Moo, "The Problem of Sensus Plenior," in Hermeneutics, Authority, and Canon (ed. D. A. Carson and John D. Woodbridge; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986), 175-211, quote from 191; see similarly C. F. D. Moule, "Fulfilment-words in the New Testament: Use and Abuse," NTS 14 (1968): 293-320. For a broader investigation of the notion of fulfillment in Paul, see D. A. Carson, "Mystery and Fulfillment: Toward a More Comprehensive Paradigm of Paul's Understanding of the Old and the New," in Justification and Variegated Nomism 2: The Paradoxes of Paul (ed. D. A. Carson, Peter T. O'Brien, and Mark A. Seifrid; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2004), 393-436. Carson identifies two pairs of polarities in Paul’s thought: promise-fulfillment, and hiddennessrevelation. As to the relationship between these two pairs of polarities, Carson asks “How can the very things that are said, on the one hand, to be predicted in the past and now fulfilled, be said, on the other, to be hidden in the past and only now, in the fullness of time, revealed? On the surface, at least, the former polarity envisages certain kinds of continuity; the latter presupposes discontinuity. How are they held together in the apostle’s mind?” (397-98). Carson’s answer is worth quoting at length: “first, there is no evidence that Paul himself was aware of any tension between these two stances; and second, within the patterns of promise and fulfillment, regularly connected with continuity, various kinds of discontinuity emerged, while within the patterns of mystery and fulfillment, regularly connected with discontinuity, various kinds of continuity emerged in that the revelation of the mystery was on occasion tied to (revelatory) exegesis of scripture. These two matters dovetail. The reason that Paul does not sense any tension between the two stances is because they genuinely lock together…In other words, Paul feels no tension between these two stances because, as he understands them, there isn’t any. And this is why the gospel itself, not to say some of its chief elements, can be simultaneously seen as something that has been (typologically) predicted and now fulfilled, and as something that has been hidden and has now been revealed” (426-27). 149 See the previous note on the issue of fulfillment taking an unexpected form. 150 The possibility of an OT precursor being referred to as fulfilled in the NT, and yet awaiting further significance / fulfillment should not be surprising given the already — not yet nature of much of NT theology. To cite just one example: when Paul claims that believers are a new creation (2 Cor 5:17), he is claiming that this is the fulfillment of God’s promise of new creation in passages such as Isa 43:18-20; 65:17-18; 66:22-24. Yet the way in which he speaks of creation groaning because of its present

Methodology

39

Although not a formal category of the hermeneutical use of the OT in the NT, mention should be made of what is often referred to as corporate solidarity.151 By this we mean the attributing of certain characteristics, actions, or tasks predicated of a group to that group’s representative to such an extent that the representative can be said to embody them on their behalf. This relationship also works in reverse, in which case something predicated of the representative is attributed to the group. Such a framework has its roots in the OT, where individuals act representatively on behalf of the nation, 152 and descriptions of the nation are applied to an individual. This phenomenon allows us to explain how NT authors can apply the same OT passage/motif to both Christ and his people without any apparent tension.153 Theological. Once we have identified Paul’s hermeneutical use of the OT, we must then attempt to discover the contribution this particular use of the OT makes to the larger theological structure(s) of Paul’s thought. Examination of the broader theological themes within both the Old and New Testament passages is important at this point, as well as consideration of other places where the OT passage is appropriated in the NT. Of special importance are places where the same NT author uses the same OT passage elsewhere in his writings, as such occurrences may reveal subtle nuances on the same theological concept, or surface an intriguing relationship between multiple theological themes. bondage in Rom 8:20-25 makes it clear that Paul holds to a yet future fulfillment that will finally exhaust the OT promise of its significance. 151 The foundational studies are Aubrey R. Johnson, The One and the Many in the Israelite Conception of God (Cardiff: University of Wales Press, 1942); H. W. Robinson, Corporate Personality in Ancient Israel (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1964) and Russell P. Shedd, Man in Community: A Study of St. Paul's Application of Old Testament and Early Jewish Conceptions of Human Solidarity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964). Recent efforts to build upon them include E. E. Ellis, The Old Testament in Early Christianity: Canon and Interpretation in the Light of Modern Research (WUNT 54; Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1991), 110-16 and N. T. Wright, The Climax of the Covenant: Christ and the Law in Pauline Theology (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992), 41-55. Although Wright does not use the term “corporate solidarity/personality,” his claim that “Cristo,j in Paul should regularly be read as ‘Messiah’; and that one of the chief significances which this word then carries is incorporative, that is, it refers to the Messiah as the one in whom the people of God are summed up, so that they can be referred to as bring ‘in’ him, as coming or growing ‘into’ him, and so forth” (41) rests on a similar framework. 152 To cite merely one of dozens examples, Phinehas’ slaying of a man and his Midianite consort turns away Yahweh’s wrath from Israel (Num 25:1-13); at a larger level both the king functioned in this way with respect to the nation, and the husband for his entire family. 153 An obvious example of this is temple imagery; in John 2:19-21 Jesus refers to his own body as the temple, while in 1 Cor 3:16 and Eph 2:21 believers are called the temple of God.

40


1.6 The Structure of Isaiah 40–66 The Structure of Isaiah 40–66 Although we will discuss the context of the Isaianic passages that Paul appropriates along the way, it will be helpful to survey the larger structure of Isaiah as a backdrop to our discussion of those specific passages. Dividing the book of Isaiah into three sections has become commonplace: First Isaiah (1–39), Second Isaiah (40–55), and Third Isaiah (56–66).154 These divisions are generally predicated on discerning different authors for each section. Although belief in the multiple authorship of Isaiah is regarded as one of the assured results of critical scholarship, there remains a small but persistent minority who argue for single authorship by the eighth-century prophet.155 Regardless of how one sees the issue, it should be stressed that there is no evidence that Paul or any of his contemporaries regarded the book of Isaiah as anything but a unified whole.156 At the same time, as we have already 154 One does find the occasional minority report. Perhaps the most common is to see a bifid structure, dividing the book into chs. 1–33 and 34–66; see, e.g., the following: William H. Brownlee, The Meaning of the Qumran Scrolls for the Bible (New York: Oxford University Press, 1964), 247-59; Avraham Gileadi, The Apocalyptic Book of Isaiah, A New Translation with Interpretive Key (Provo, Utah: Hebraeus Press, 1982), 171-83; John D. W. Watts Isaiah 1-33 (WBC 24; Dallas; Word, 1985); Isaiah 34-66, (WBC 25; Dallas; Word, 1987); Craig A. Evans, “On the Unity and Parallel Structure of Isaiah,” VT 38 (1988): 129-47. This approach often takes as a starting point the scribal break between chapters 33 and 34 in 1QIsa; on the significance of the scribal divisions in 1QIsa, see John W. Olley, “’Hear the Word of YHWH’: The Structure of the Book of Isaiah in 1QIsaa,” VT 43 (1993): 19-49. While retaining a three-part structure, J. Alec Motyer differs from the scholarly consensus in seeing the divisions as 1–37 (the book of King), 38–55 (the book of the Servant), and 56–66 (the book of the Anointed Conqueror); see J. A. Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers Grove: IVP, 1993), 13-34. 155 See, e.g., the following: Oswald T. Allis, The Unity of Isaiah: A Study in Prophecy (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1950); Rachel Margulies, The Indivisible Isaiah: Evidence for the Single Authorship of the Prophetic Book (New York: Yeshiva University, 1964); John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 1–39 (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986), 17-28; J. A. Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers Grove: IVP, 1993), 25-30; G.K. Beale, The Erosion of Inerrancy in Evangelicalism: Responding to New Challenges to Biblical Authority (Wheaton: Crossway, 2008), 123-59. 156 Despite the hegemony that multiple authorship holds within the academy, a number of recent studies have highlighted the unity of the book from various angles; see, e.g., Anthony J. Tomassino, "Isaiah 1.1–2.4 and 63–66, and the Composition of the Isaianic Corpus," JSOT 57 (1993): 81-98; Rolf Rendtorff, "The Composition of the Book of Isaiah," in Canon and Theology: Overtures to an Old Testament Theology (ed. Rolf Rendtorff; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 146-69; Robert H. O'Connell, Concentricity and Continuity: The Literary Structure of Isaiah (JSOTSup 188; Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994); Robin Routledge, “Is There a Narrative Substructure underlying the Book of Isaiah?” TynBul 55 (2004): 183-204. For a slightly negative assessment of these recent proposals of unity, see David Carr, "Reaching for Uni-

The Structure of Isaiah 40–66

41

noted, Paul draws more frequently from Isaiah 40–66 than he does from chapters 1–39.157 More specifically, Paul draws most frequently from Isaiah 40–55. Therefore, we will survey the structure of Isaiah 40–66, with particular emphasis on chs. 40–55.

1.6.1 The Structure of Isaiah 40–55158 The opening pericope (40:1-11) sets the stage for the entirety of chs. 40– 55.159 The prophetic cry of comfort for Jerusalem is predicated on her sins being pardoned and the announcement of a new exodus that will display the glory of the Lord through the establishment of his word (40:1-8). As a result Zion is summoned to announce the good news of God’s reign, described in shepherd imagery (40:9-11). The two-part structure of this prologue foreshadows the two-part structure of Isaiah 40–55, in which 40:1-8 anticipates the key themes of chs. 41–48 and 40:9-

ty in Isaiah," JSOT 57 (1993): 61-80. For a helpful discussion of trends within evangelical scholarship on this subject, see Richard L. Schultz, "How many 'Isaiahs' were there and what does it matter? Prophetic Inspiration in Recent Evangelical Scholarship," in Evangelicals and Scripture: Tradition, Authority, and Hermeneutics (ed. Vincent Bacote, Laura C. Miguelez, and Dennis Okholm; Downers Grove: IVP, 2004), 150-70. One of the more recent and thorough surveys has been done by Christopher R. Seitz, “Isaiah, Book of,” ABD 3:472-507. But it should be stressed that since our goal in this study is to explore Paul’s use of Isaiah in Galatians, what ultimately matters here is Paul’s perspective on Isaianic authorship of the entire book. There is no reason to doubt that Paul viewed the entire book of Isaiah as coming from the eighth-century prophet. 157 Our study will show only two places where Paul may draw from Isaiah 1–39: Galatians 5:5 and 5:22-23, both of which may depend on Isa 32:15-20. 158 Attempts to determine the structure of Isaiah 40–55 are notoriously challenging and often produce widely varying results; for a recent survey of scholarly discussion, see John Goldingay and David Payne, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40– 55: Volume 1 (ICC; New York: T&T Clark, 2006), 17-25, 49-57. Their summary of the challenges are worth quoting at length: “Isaiah 40–55 is not a structured whole in the manner of a work such as Lamentations where we can distinguish between five separate poems, and trace concrete markers of structure such as the use of an acrostic form. Nor is it a work structured in the manner of a narrative such as Ruth or Esther, with a series of distinguishable acts or scenes. There is movement through the chapters, though it has a spiral as much as a linear character. It might be more appropriately compared with a symphony or a suite than with a piece of Aristotlian rhetoric…There are ways in which strong themes develop and points at which strong structural markers appear. There are other themes or structural markers that different interpreters may appropriately highlight in different ways” (19). 159 In passing we should note that Isaiah 36–39 provides the narrative context of what is found in Isaiah 40–55; see, e.g., Edgar W. Conrad, “The Royal Narratives and the Structure of the Book of Isaiah,” JSOT 41 (1988): 67-81.

42


11 looks forward to chs. 49–55. 160 Further binding Isaiah 40–55 together are the connections between the prologue of 40:1-11 and 55:6-13, suggesting that the latter serves as an epilogue to Isaiah 40–55.161 In Isaiah 40–48, the emphasis rests on “God’s declaration that he will demonstrate his deity to the world by delivering his servant Israel from Babylon.”162 After the prologue (40:1-11), Isaiah 40:12–44:22 focuses on Yahweh displaying his unique glory by redeeming his sinful servant Israel through a New Exodus. Although Yahweh chose Israel to be his servant as a light to the nations through whom he would display his unique glory (41:8-10; 42:1-9), Israel is blinded and deafened by her sin and thus under judgment (42:18-25; 43:22-28). Despite her sin, Israel remains precious to Yahweh (43:1-7; 44:1-5); consequently he will lead her in a New Exodus that will result in the transformation of creation itself (41:17-20; 42:10-17; 43:14-21). By doing so Yahweh will show that he alone is the true God, and that the idols of the nations are lifeless imposters (40:12-31; 41:1-7, 21-29; 42:8-9, 17; 43:8-15; 44:6-20). Isaiah 44:23–48:22 continues these themes, but in doing so focuses on Yahweh’s use of Cyrus as the instrument to free Israel (44:23–45:25) and bring judgment on the Babylonians (46:1–47:15). The section closes with a challenge for Israel to recognize the sovereign hand of Yahweh in orchestrating these events (48:1-22). Although many of the themes from chs. 40–48 continue, Isaiah 49– 55 mark a shift. Because Israel has failed as Yahweh’s Servant to be a light to the nations, Yahweh raises up a new Servant (49:1-13). This Servant has a mission to both Israel itself and the nations, strongly suggesting an individual. Yahweh has not forgotten Zion; in fact, he will restore her once again (49:14–50:3). Despite facing opposition the Ser160 Roy F. Melugin, The Formation of Isaiah 40–55 (BZAW 141; New York: W. de Gruyter, 1976), 82-86. He highlights three themes present in 40:1-8 that are prominent in chs. 41–48 but less so in chs. 49–55: (1) the “way” in the desert by which Yahweh leads his people in a New Exodus; (2) Yahweh delivering his people so that his glory is made known; and (3) the reliability of Yahweh’s word. In addition to these thematic links, Melugin notes “the tense structure of 40,1-2 corresponds to the tense sequence of the salvation-assurance oracles, a genre which is pivotal in chapters 41–48 and relatively unimportant in the latter part of the book” (85). Regarding links between 40:9-11 and chs. 49–55, he highlights three: (1) messengers announcing the return of Yahweh as ruler in Zion; (2) the “voice” of the messengers; and (3) the victory of Yahweh’s arm. Although differing on the details, others have also argued for the importance of Isa 40:1-11 for chs. 40–55; see, e.g., Klaus Kiesow, Exodustexte im Jesajabuch (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1979), 23-66. 161 Melugin (Formation, 86-87) identifies three thematic links: (1) Yahweh’s pardon of sin; (2) the experience of an exodus through the wilderness; and (3) the reliability of Yahweh’s word in contrast to man’s. 162 John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40–66 (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 15.

The Structure of Isaiah 40–66

43

vant expresses complete confidence in Yahweh (50:4-11). As God’s people await the New Exodus that Yahweh will accomplish, they are to recall his faithfulness to Abraham as the grounds for confidence in Yahweh’s eschatological salvation (51:1-23). Therefore Zion should awake and purify herself in preparation for Yahweh’s redemption (52:16). Because Yahweh will bare his arm in the sight of all the nations, heralds will announce the good news of salvation which culminates in Yahweh’s reign being established in a restored Zion (52:7-12).163 This promised salvation will be accomplished by the Servant, who vicariously suffers for Israel’s sin but is ultimately vindicated (52:13–53:12). In response to the Servant’s redemption, Zion is called to celebrate her restoration and the establishment of a covenant of peace (54:1-17). After an invitation to enjoy the Servant’s redemption (55:1-5), Yahweh reasserts his unique glory by assuring Zion that he will accomplish all that he has promised (55:6-13). Throughout this section several themes are woven together, often in a complex manner: the unique glory of Yahweh, the restoration of Zion/Jerusalem, forgiveness of sins, return from exile through a new exodus that transforms creation itself, salvation extending to the nationns, and the enigmatic Servant figure.164 Each of these elements is linked to Yahweh fulfilling his promises, especially his covenant with Abraham (cp. 41:8; 44:1-5; 51:1-3; 54:1-3).

163 For the assertion that Yahweh’s kingship is crucial to the hidden structure of Isaiah 40–55, see Tryggve N. D. Mettinger, "In Search of the Hidden Structure: YHWH as King in Isaiah 40-55," in Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies of an Interpretive Tradition (ed. Craig C. Broyles and Craig A. Evans; VTSup 70.1; Leiden: Brill, 1997), 143-54. Using the analogy of a musical score, he concludes that close study of Isaiah 40–55 reveals “a profound unity of concept that manifests itself in this music: Underneath it all is the hidden structure of the archaic mythopoetic theme of YHWH’s victory over chaos, his kingship and his triumphant return to Zion” (152). 164 Compare the conclusion of John I. Durham, "Isaiah 40-55: A New Creation, a New Exodus, a New Messiah," in The Yahweh/Baal Confrontation and Other Studies in Biblical Literature and Archaeology: Essays in Honour of Emmet Willard Hamrick (ed Julia M. O'Brien and Fred L. Horton; SBEC 35; Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen, 1995), 47-56.

44


1.6.2 The Structure of Isaiah 56–66165 Whereas the focus of Isaiah 40–55 is the redemption of Israel/Zion through the work of the Servant, chapters 56–66 emphasize the implications of that redemption. There is general agreement that these chapters divide into three sections.166 Those who have experienced the saving righteousness of Yahweh through the work of the Servant should live righteous lives marked by whole-hearted devotion to Yahweh and not merely external ritual (56:1–59:21). To fuel hope for God’s people as they experience the already of their redemption but await its future culmination, the prophet returns to a compelling vision of God’s reign with and over his people in a fully restored Zion (60:1–62:12). The final section returns to the theme of righteous living, but is set against the backdrop of Yahweh’s coming judgment and salvation, culminating in a new heavens and new earth (63:1–66:24). These chapters highlight what a life of righteousness looks like. It does not consist of mere external conformity to certain practices, but total devotion to Yahweh. So all-encompassing is Yahweh’s salvation that it will include those who previously had been excluded, including the Gentiles who turn to Yahweh. It will even result in a new heavens and new earth where all of God’s people dwell in peace. 165 Our overview of Isaiah 56–66 is largely dependent on Oswalt, Isaiah 40–66, 12-19, 451-55, 461-65. Discussion continues as to the structure and purpose of Isa 56–66 and its relationship to Isa 1–39 and 40–55. For helpful surveys of the issues and proposed solutions, see Karl Pauritsch, Die neue Gemeinde: Gott sammelt Ausgestossene und Arme (Jesaia 56-66) (AnBib 47; Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1971), 1-30; Paul D. Hanson, The Dawn of Apocalyptic: The Historical and Sociological Roots of Jewish Apocalyptic Eschatology (Rev. ed; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979), 32-46; Seizo Sekine, Die Tritojesajanische Sammlung (Jes 56-66) redaktionsgeschichtlich untersucht (BZAW 175; Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 1989), 3-23; Brooks Schramm, The Opponents of Third Isaiah: Reconstructing the Cultic History of the Restoration (JSOTSup 193; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1995), 11-52. The critical consensus still regards Isa 56–66 as the work of either a distinct third author or the redactor of the entire book, though some have argued that Isa 56–66 comes from the same hand as 40–55; see e.g., Charles C. Torrey, The Second Isaiah: A New Interpretation (New York: C. Scribner's Sons, 1928), 1-37; James D. Smart, History and Theology in Second Isaiah: A Commentary on Isaiah 35,40-66 (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1965), 13-33; Fritz Maass, "Tritojesaja?," in Das Ferne und nahe Wort (ed. Fritz Maass; BZAW 105; Berlin: A. Töpelmann, 1967), 153-63. 166 Of course, even those scholars who agree on the broader structure often differ on the details. Some scholars have even argued for a detailed chiasm in Isaiah 56–66; see, e.g., Eberhard Sehmsdorf, “Studien zur Redaktionsgeschichte von Jesaja 56–66 (I, II),” ZAW 84 (1972): 517-76; Gregory J. Polan, “Salvation in the Midst of Struggle,” TBT 23 (1985): 90-97; idem., In the Ways of Justice toward Salvation (New York: Lang, 1986). While not arguing for a detailed chiasm, Oswalt (Isaiah 40–66, 461-65) sees 56:1–59:21 and 63:1–66:24 emphasizing “false worship, the absence of God, an inability to do rightesousness.” The centerpiece then is 60:1–62:12, which reiterates the eschatological hope of Yahweh establishing his reign in its fullness.

Scope and Overview of this Project

45

1.6.3 Summary The burden of Isaiah 40–55 is to comfort God’s people that Yahweh will lead his people in a New Exodus that will restore Zion/Jerusalem. This restoration will be accomplished through the work of Yahweh’s Servant, who redeems Israel by vicariously suffering for Israel’s sins. So extensive is this salvation that it will extend to the ends of the earth. As a result, Yahweh will demonstrate that he alone is the true God in contrast to the idols of the nations. In Isaiah 56–66 the servants of Yahweh who have been redeemed by the work of the Servant are called to live in a righteous manner.167 Although they experience the initial blessings of Yahweh’s saving righteousness, they must await the final consummation of his reign in a new heavens and a new earth. As we shall see in the course of our study, many of these same themes occur in Galatians.

1.7 Scope and Overview of this Project Scope and Overview of this Project Now that the groundwork has been laid we may proceed with our examination of Isaiah in Galatians. In each of the three main chapters that follow, we will first work through the text of Galatians (two chapters at a time) and identify possible quotations, allusions, echoes, and thematic parallels. Using both tiers of our methodology, we will seek to determine the probability that such an appropriation of the Old Testament is in fact present. Then we will assess the significance and function of Isaianic influence within that section of Galatians, as well as (where possible) draw out points of contact within the larger framework of Pauline theology. Along the way the reader is encouraged to bear in mind the cumulative nature of the case that is being built as each proposed quotation, allusion, echo or thematic parallel is discussed. In our concluding chapter we will summarize our findings and then: (1) compare our sketch of the Isaianic narrative substructure with that of other scholars; (2) assess the value of an approach to the study of the Old Testament in the New Testament that takes into account more subtle appropriations such as allusions, echoes and thematica parallels; (3) indicate how Paul’s use of Isaiah informs our understanding of the 167 This transition from Servant to servants is a key link between Isaiah 40–55 and 56–66; see Joseph Blenkinsopp, "The Servant and the Servants in Isaiah and the Formation of the Book," in Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies of an Interpretive Tradition (ed. Craig C. Broyles and Craig A. Evans; VTSup 70.1; Leiden: Brill, 1997), 15576.

46


structure of Galatians as a whole; and (4) articulate how the intertextual matrix of Isaiah and Galatians sheds light on Paul’s self-understanding and his gospel message.

Chapter 2

Singing the Servant’s Song in Galatians 1–2: Paul’s Apostolic Ministry Fulfills the Servant’s Mission in Isaiah 49 and 53 Singing the Servant’s Song

2.1 Overview of the Argument in Galatians 1–2 Overview of the Argument in Galatians 1–2 Outside of the Corinthian correspondence, Galatians 1–2 provides the lengthiest defense of Paul’s apostolic call and ministry. Although the exact circumstances prompting Paul’s letter to the Galatians remain disputed, it seems clear that shortly after Paul established the Galatian churches, teachers advocating circumcision and Torah-obedience as necessary components of Christian experience infiltrated the churches. 1 How Paul found out is unknown, but the tone of the letter abundantly demonstrates the seriousness of the situation. Although not universally accepted, most scholars have concluded that Paul’s apostolic authority was in some way questioned by these new teachers.2 This concern is evidenced in 1:1 by the immediate qualifications appended to the title avpo,stoloj, two of which are negative (ouvk avpV avnqrw,pwn ouvde. diV avnqrw,pou). These two negative qualifications emphatically reject the human origin and agency of Paul’s apostolic ministry. Instead, Paul claims, his apostolic call came through the agency of both Jesus Christ and God the Father. Paul is intent upon placing the 1 2

Determining exactly what Paul’s opponents taught is not essential for our purposes. Perhaps the most notable exception to the majority position is found in George Lyons, Pauline Autobiography: Toward a New Understanding (SBLDS 73; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1985). He argues that Paul’s rhetorical goals, and not the charges of his opponents, dictate the apostle’s autobiographical statements in Gal 1–2. While Lyons cautions against excessive mirror-reading are salient, he fails to offer compelling rhetorical reasons for Paul’s extensive autobiographical remarks. No doubt Paul presents himself as an ideal representative of the gospel he preaches, as Lyons argues, but this rhetorical goal is not sufficient to account for the extent, tone, and content of Paul’s autobiographical remarks in Gal 1–2.

48

Singing the Servant’s Song

discussion of his apostolic ministry within a vertical (i.e., God-tohuman) rather than a horizontal (i.e., person-to-person) context. Paul’s “vertical” explanation and defense of his apostolic calling and ministry are oriented towards his interaction with the church in Jerusalem, including its “pillars” (stu/loi, 2:9). Whatever the specific charges of Paul’s opponents were regarding his apostleship, he considered it imperative to establish the divine origin of his calling as the apostle to the Gentiles. As the analysis below demonstrates, Paul draws heavily upon language, themes, and concepts taken from Isa 40–66 to argue for the divine origin of his apostolic call and ministry.

2.2 Instances of Isaianic Influence Instances of Isaianic Influence In order to demonstrate the extent to which Paul draws upon Isa 40–66 in Gal 1–2, we will examine each section by first briefly summarizing the pericope and then identifying places where Paul’s argument is shaped by his understanding of Isa 40–66.

2.2.1 Galatians 1:1-5 Paul uses a broadly consistent structure to begin his letters that has parallels in the broader Greco-Roman culture:3 self-identification, identification of the recipients, a salutation, and a prayer of thanksgiving. While not all of the elements are found in every epistle, 4 the general pattern is clearly recognizable. Often within these elements one finds clues to major emphases to be developed in the body of the letter itself, and Galatians is no exception.5 As noted above, Paul refers to himself as an avpo,stoloj, and then adds three phrases to describe the nature of his apostleship before referring to the recipients simply as “the churches in 3

4 5

See, e.g., William G. Doty, Letters in Primitive Christianity (GBS; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1973), 1-48; Franz Schnider and Werner Stenger, Studien zum Neutestamentlichen Briefformular (NTTS 11; Leiden: Brill, 1987), 3-41; John L. White, Light from Ancient Letters (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986), 198-202; David E. Aune, The New Testament in Its Literary Environment (LEC 8; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1987), 158-82; and Stanley K. Stowers, Letter Writing in Greco-Roman Antiquity (LEC 5; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986), 20-26. Galatians, for example, lacks a thanksgiving section, which signals the seriousness of the matters at hand. For a recent defense of the importance of the introduction in interpreting Galatians, see Robert A. Bryant, The Risen Crucified Christ in Galatians (SBLDS 185; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2001), 1-142.

Instances of Isaianic Influence

49

Galatia” (1:1-2).6 There has been much discussion on the origin of the apostolic office in the early church, 7 and one of the more intriguing suggestions is the possibility that it stems from several passages from Isa 40–66.8 It is to this possibility we now turn. The term avpo,stoloj occurs only once in the LXX (1 Kgs 14:6).9 However, the verb avposte,llw and its related compound form evxaposte,llw appear over 1,000 times in the LXX, and the two appear eight times in Isa 40–66.10 In each of these eight occurrences it translates xl;v'.11 Of these eight references, one is particularly noteworthy as a possible background for avpo,stoloj. Isaiah 61:1,12 a text Luke presents as pro6

7

8

9

10 11

12

While Paul also expands upon his apostleship in the prescript of Romans, 1–2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Colossians, 1–2 Timothy, and Titus, in each case the expansion is shorter, and notably, positive in nature. Here in Galatians, however, two of the three descriptive phrases are negative, and the length of the digression is an indication that the nature of his apostolic call and ministry were directly relevant to the Galatian crisis. For a helpful survey of the Forschungssituation through 1986, see F. H. Agnew, "The Origin of the NT Apostle-Concept: A Review of Research," JBL 105 (1986): 75-96; important studies since then include Andrew C. Clark, "Apostleship: Evidence from the New Testament and Early Christian Literature," VoxEv 19 (1989): 49-82; Andrew C. Clark, "The Role of the Apostles," in Witness to the Gospel: The Theology of Acts (ed. I. H. Marshall and David Peterson; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 169-90. The most common theory remains the sending conventions of the OT and rabbinic Judaism, usually linked to the concept of the šälîaH, but as Agnew (“Origin,” 85-90) shows, the view continues to have its critics. See, e.g., Ferdinand Hahn, "Der Apostolat im Urchristentum: Seine Eigenart und seine Voraussetzungen," KD 20 (1974): 54-77; Peter Stuhlmacher, Das paulinische Evangelium (FRLANT 95; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1968), 247-54; Peter Stuhlmacher, "The Pauline Gospel," in The Gospel and the Gospels (ed. Peter Stuhlmacher; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), 149-72; Karl O. Sandnes, Paul - One of the Prophets? A Contribution to the Apostle's Self-Understanding (WUNT 43; Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1991), 17-20; Evans, “Paul and the Prophets,” 115-28. In Symmachus an additional occurrence is found in Isa 18:1. The related noun avpostolh, (apostleship) does occur six times in the LXX (Deut 22:7; 1 Kgs 5:14; Ps 77:49; Eccl 8:8; Cant 4:13; Jer 39:36), but always with the more general meaning of something sent off/away and never with a specialized meaning like one finds in the NT. For avposte,llw see 43:14; 48:16; 57:9; 58:6; 61:1; evxaposte,llw occurs in 50:1 (2x) and 66:19. In fact, the only times that xl;v' is not rendered by a form of either avposte,llw and evxaposte,llw in Isa 40–66 is when it is not translated at all (42:19; 58:9), when it refers to freeing the captive exiles (in which case evpistre,fw is used, 45:13), or when the LXX departs significantly from the MT (55:11, though note that the alt. reading in Symmachus does contain a form of avposte,llw). Isaiah 61:1ff. has sometimes been suggested as an additional Servant Song; see, e.g., W. W. Cannon, "Isaiah 61,1-3 an Ebed Jahweh Poem," ZAW 47 (1929): 284-88; Albin van Hoonacker, Het boek Isaias: vertaald uit het Hebreeuwsch en in doorloopende aanteekeningen verklaard (Brugge: Sinte Catharina Drukkerij, 1932), 196-97; Julian Morgenstern, "Isaiah 61," HUCA 40-41 (1969-1970): 109-21; Ulrich Kellermann, "Tritojesaja und das Geheimnis des Gottesknechts: Erwägungen zu Jes 59:21, 61:1-3, 66:18-24," BN (1991): 46-82; Motyer, Prophecy, 75-76; Pao, Acts, 76-77; H. A. J. Kruger, "Isaiah

50


grammatic for Jesus’ ministry in 4:16-30, is one of only three passages in the entire LXX where the verbs avpo,stellw and euvaggeli,zw appear together in the same verse.13 There the two verbs are linked to the empowerment of the Spirit of the Lord; this prophetic figure is anointed “to proclaim good news to the poor [~ywI©n"[] rFEåb;l. / euvaggeli,sasqai ' . / avpe,stalken]” me to bring healing and freeptwcoi/j]” and “sent [ynIx;’lv dom from bondage. In Gal 1–2, the relationship between Paul’s calling as an apostle and his proclamation of the gospel are intricately linked throughout. Furthermore, these two concepts are even linked to the “poor” (cp. ptwcoi/j in Isa 61:1 with ptwcw/n in Gal 2:10). Additional evidence is found in Rom 10:14-16, where in the midst of citing both Isa 52:7 and 53:1, Paul also likely alludes to Isa 61:1.14 The key verbs khru,ssw (10:8, 14, 15), avposte,llw (10:15), and euvaggeli,zw (10:15) are found in close proximity in Isa 61:1, leading to the conclusion that Paul has conflated the three texts within his understanding of his apostolic calling.15 We may also note that the figure in Isa 61:2 is sent “to call out a year of the Lord’s favor [kale,sai evniauto.n kuri,ou dekto,n],” which is similar to the “favorable time [kairw/| dektw/]| ” announced by Yahweh in connection with the ministry of the Servant in Isa 49:8. When considered together, a plausible case can be made for Isa 49, 52–53, 61 forming at least part of Paul’s apostolic self-understanding. A final line of support is found in the targumic and rabbinic traditions about latter-day prophets.16 There a connection is made between the rFEïb;m. (= LXX euvaggelizome,nou) of Isa 52:7 and the prophet of Isa 61:1.17

13 14 15

16 17

61:1-3 (4-9) 10-11: Transfer of privileges, an ìdentikit' of the Servant of the Lord?," HvTSt 58 (2002): 1555-76; Grace I. Emmerson, Isaiah 56–66 (T&T Clark Study Guides; London, New York: T&T Clark International, 2004), 75-76. Without denying the number of thematic parallels, the larger context of Isa 61 suggests instead a different, yet related, figure; see, e.g., Richard L. Schultz, "The King in the Book of Isaiah," in The Lord's Anointed: Interpretation of Old Testament Messianic Texts (ed. P. E. Satterthwaite, Richard S. Hess, and Gordon J. Wenham; Tyndale House Studies Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995), 141-65, esp. 160-62 The other two occurrences are in 1 Sam 31:9 and 1 Chr 10:9, which are parallel accounts of the death of Saul and his sons; these can be quickly discarded from consideration as possible background. Evans, “Paul and the Prophets,” 116. Somewhat surprisingly, Wagner (Heralds, 170-80) misses this connection to Isa 61:1 in his otherwise excellent examination of Isa 52:7 in Rom 10:15; one of the few commentators to note it is James D. G. Dunn, Romans 9–16 (WBC 38b; Dallas: Word, 1988), 621. See Stuhlmacher, Paulinische Evangelium, 247-54; idem, “Pauline Gospel,” 149-72; Sandnes, Paul, 17-20, 166-70. These same two texts appear to be linked in 11Q13. There the messenger of Isa 52:7 is identified as ÎxÐwOrh xyXm˜ (“the anointed of the Spir[it]”) referred to in Dan 9:25 sent ~ylbaÐh Î~Ðxñl (“to comfo[rt] the [afflicted”), a likely allusion to Isa 61:2. Although the fragmentary condition of the document makes certainty impossible, those at Qu-


51

This link is further developed in the Targums, where the singular rFEïb;m. is expanded to include any and/or all prophetic figures connected to the end times, including the Messiah himself.18 There is at least suggestive evidence that this tradition extends back into the first century, but it remains to be decisively demonstrated. 19 If Paul was in fact familiar with such a tradition (even in an earlier or less developed form), it is possible his own conception of the apostolic ministry may have points of contact with this tradition. By way of evaluation we may note that an Isaianic background to the concept of “apostle” should not be dismissed lightly.20 The convergence of thematic links between Isa 49, 52–53, 61 and the themes present in Gal 1–2, as well as the volume and recurrence of allusions and echoes from these same Isaianic chapters throughout Gal 1–2, makes an Isaianic background to “apostle” a reasonable possibility. Such a possibility is strengthened by the conflation of Isa 52:7; 53:1; 61:1 found in Rom 10:15, another central passage in Paul’s apostolic selfunderstanding. The evidence supplied by the targumic traditions, while certainly suggestive, is weakened by the failure to find clear support in first-century Judaism, though we must not exclude the possibility. As a result, we consider that Paul’s concept of “apostle” reveals thematic parallels to the Isaianic background sketched above, but do not regard it as the only (or perhaps even the most prominent) source. Next, as is standard in his letters, Paul uses the salutation ca,rij u`mi/n kai. eivrh,nh avpo. qeou/ patro.j h`mw/n kai. kuri,ou VIhsou/ Cristou/ (1:3).21 Scholars remain split as to whether Paul’s use of ca,rij was an intentional alteration of the standard Greek salutation cai,rein, but there is substantial

18 19

20 21

mran appear to have connected the messenger of Isa 52:7 and the Spirit-anointed figure of Isa 61:1-2 with a messianic Melchizedek-type figure. By focusing attention on an individual figure, therefore, the identification made here in Qumran differs from the expansion of the messenger figure into a plurality of prophetic figures. On the significance of 11Q13, see, e.g., M. de Jonge and A. S. van der Woude, "11Q Melchizedek and the New Testament," NTS 12 (1966): 301-26; E. Puech, "Notes sur le manuscrit de 11Q Melkisédeq," RQ 12 (1987): 483-513; F. Manzi, "La figura di Melchisedek: Saggio di bibliografia aggoirnata," Ephemerides Liturgicae 109 (1995): 331-49. Stuhlmacher, Paulinische Evangelium, 151. Sandnes (Paul, 169-70) lists the LXX of Psa 68:12; Isa 40:1-2; Joel 3:5 as possible texts where the “tradition of eschatological prophets as heralds of good tidings” may be present in nascent form, but admits there is no text “which proves that these [eschatological] heralds were identified as prophets” (170). For a sampling of the response that Stuhlmacher’s theory has received, see “Pauline Gospel,” 151 n. 12. This formula appears in all thirteen epistles attributed to Paul, with only slight modifications.

52


agreement that his use of eivrh,nh stems from Paul’s Jewish heritage.22 But can we be more specific? Of all the books in the OT, the noun eivrh,nh appears most frequently (29x) in Isaiah (LXX), fourteen of which are in chs. 40–66.23 The messianic figure of 9:5-6 is called the “prince of peace” who establishes peace through his rule. Peace is promised to those who steadfastly trust in Yahweh (26:3, 12), and the fruit of Yahweh’s eschatological righteousness is referred to as peace (32:15-18).24 Isaiah 40–66 further develops the eschatological nature of the peace spoken of in 32:15-18. Yahweh describes himself as the one creating peace (45:7), and if Israel had simply obeyed his commands they would have experienced peace like a river (48:18). The heralds who announce the good news of Yahweh’s salvation proclaim peace (52:7),25 a peace that is accomplished by the suffering of the Servant (53:5). Yahweh’s actions are the result of a covenant of peace that he will establish (54:10), producing peace for God’s people (54:13). Those whom Yahweh heals will experience his peace, but not the wicked (57:19-21), who are described as not knowing the path of peace (59:8). Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the end result of Yahweh’s saving action is described as a river of peace that sustains God’s people (66:12). In short, peace ( ~Alv' / eivrh,nh) is a oneword shorthand for the resulting state of God’s eschatological salvation.26 22

23 24 25 26

For these matters and more, see the excellent discussion of epistolary prescripts in Schnider and Stenger, Neutestamentlichen Briefformular, 25-41. Ciampa (Presence and Function, 48) suggests the possibility that Paul’s use of cari,j and eivrh,nh is linked to the Aaronic blessing of Num 6:25-26. Intriguingly, cai,rein and eivrh,nh do appear in close proximity in Isa 57:19-21. Yahweh promises peace (eivrh,nh) to those who are restored (57:19), but there is no joy (cai,rein) for the wicked (57:21). The Hebrew word ~Alv' is behind both words. Despite the verbal parallel, a relationship between Paul’s epistolary salutations and Isa 57:19-21 is highly unlikely. A notable exception to seeing Paul’s use of peace in his salutations as primarily Jewish in nature is Stanley Porter, who, although acknowledging the possibility of Semitic influence, considers the Hellenistic background to be more significant for Paul; see “Peace” DPL, 695-99 and Stanley E. Porter, Katallasso in Ancient Greek Literature with Reference to the Pauline Writings (EFN 5; Cordoba: Ediciones el Almendro, 1994), 125-89. The next closest are Psalms and Jeremiah, each with 24 occurrences. Of the 29 appearances of eivrh,nh, only three (14:30; 27:5; 32:4) do not translate a form of the root ~lv. See below, 214-21, for a discussion of this passage and its relationship to Paul’s discussion of the fruit of the Spirit in Gal 5:22-23. In passing it should be noted that Paul cites Isa 52:7 in Rom 10:15 to illuminate his own ministry and its place within God’s redemptive plan. This conclusion is further confirmed by the terms that are found in parallelism with peace in Isa 40–66: light (45:7), righteousness (48:18; 60:17), good news (52:7), healing (53:5; 57:19), lovingkindness (54:10), being taught of Yahweh (54:14), being taken away from evil (57:2), justice (59:8), and the glory of the nations (66:12). For a similar


53

When we examine Paul’s use of eivrh,nh, we discover a similar eschatological understanding. Setting aside the occurrences of the word in his salutations for the moment, Paul uses eivrh,nh in a way that reveals the “already – not yet” dimension that is characterizes his theology. On the one hand, Paul describes believers as experiencing eivrh,nh in the present, as a result of God’s justifying decree (Rom 5:1). Elsewhere Paul prays for believers to experience eivrh,nh (Rom 15:13, 33; 2 Cor 13:11; Gal 6:16; Eph 6:23; Col 3:15; 2 Thess 3:16), as well as calls them to pursue it in their lives (Rom 12:18; 14:19; 2 Cor 13:11; Eph 4:3; 1 Thess 5:13; 2 Tim 2:22). Peace is both an aspect of the fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:22) as well as the by-product of a mind set on the Spirit (Rom 8:6). But in at least one passage Paul links eivrh,nh with the future hope of the believer.27 In Rom 2:10 eivrh,nh, in addition to do,xa and timh,, is the reward at the judgment for those who do good. Admittedly the emphasis in the Pauline corpus is on the present experience of peace, but the future reference in Rom 2:10 confirms that an already not-yet dimension exists in Paul’s understanding of eivrh,nh. An additional piece of evidence for an Isaianic background to eivrh,nh is the connection between peace and reconciliation language in Paul. 28 In Rom 5:1-11 the two are linked by means of an inclusio, where eivrh,nh in 5:1 is clearly parallel to katalla,ssw and katallagh, in 5:10-11. Even

27

28

conclusion with respect to Isa 40–55, see Ulrich Mauser, The Gospel of Peace: A Scriptural Message for Today's World (Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1992), 25-26 and especially Albin Huss, "The Voice of Isaiah in Paul's Proclamation of Peace" (Ph.D. diss., Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, 2005); for a broader survey of eivrh,nh in both biblical and non-biblical Greek, see W. Foerster, “eivrh,nh,” TDNT 2:400-20. For defense of the view that Paul has believers in view in Rom 2:10, see Francis Watson, Paul, Judaism, and the Gentiles: A Sociological Approach (SNTSMS 56; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), 119-21; Thomas R. Schreiner, The Law and Its Fulfillment: A Pauline Theology of Law (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993), 179-204; Simon J. Gathercole, Where is Boasting? Early Jewish Soteriology and Paul's Response in Romans 1-5 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 124-34. For the contrary view that Paul is speaking of the hypothetical possibility of a person doing the necessary good for salvation (hypothetical because the power of sin makes such a contingency impossible), see esp. Frank Thielman, From Plight to Solution: A Jewish Framework for Understanding Paul's View of the Law in Galatians and Romans (NovTSup 61; Leiden: Brill, 1989), 9296. See, e.g., Otto Betz, "Fleischliche und 'geistliche' Christuserkenntnis nach 2 Korinther 5:16," Theologische Beiträge 14 (1983): 167-79; Cilliers Breytenbach, Versöhnung: Eine Studie zur paulinischen Soteriologie (WMANT 60; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1989), 99-104; Porter, Katallasso, 125-89; Kim, Paul and the New Perspective, 21438; Beale, “Reconciliation in 2 Corinthians 5-7,” 217-47; and especially Otfried Hofius, Paulusstudien (WUNT 51; Tübingen: Mohr, 1989), 1-49. With the exception of Porter, all these authors stress the significance of Isa 40–66 for understanding reconciliation (and by extension peace) in Paul with reference to 2 Cor 5 in particular.

54


more pertinent is Eph 2:11-18,29 where peace and reconciliation are linked in a discussion that expresses both vertical and horizontal elements. In the context of discussing Gentile inclusion in the people of God, Paul refers to Jesus himself as our peace (2:14), who established peace (poiw/n eivrh,nhn) between Jew and Gentile (2:15) and reconciled (avpokatalla,xh|) them to God at the cross (2:16). A conflated citation of the LXX of Isa 57:19 (“Peace, peace to those far away and to those who are near,” and the Lord said, “I will heal him”) and Isa 52:7 (“As an hour upon the mountains, as the feet of those proclaiming the good news of the message of peace, as those proclaiming the good news of good things, for I will make your salvation audible, saying to Zion, ‘Your God shall reign’”) immediately follows this description of Christ’s work on the cross. 30 Paul’s contextually sensitive handling of Isa 52:7 and 57:19 provides a clear link between the concepts of peace and reconciliation as an outgrowth of his reflection upon Jesus’ death against the backdrop of Yahweh’s promised salvation in Isa 40–66.31 In light of these clear connections, there should be little doubt that peace and reconciliation are closely linked in Paul’s thought, and understood against the backdrop of Isa 40–66.32 Finally, one should not underestimate the importance of Paul’s wish of “peace [eivrh,nh] and mercy [e;leoj]” upon all who walk in accordance with the new creation, “even the Israel of God” (Gal 6:16). These words, functioning as a sort of “punch-line” to the close of the letter, will be examined below.33 But to anticipate our discussion, they function as a 29

30

31

32 33

The Pauline authorship of Ephesians continues to be a debated issue. For a defense of Pauline authorship, see, e.g., the following: A. van Roon, The Authenticity of Ephesians (NovTSup 39; Leiden: Brill, 1974); J.H. Roberts, “The Enigma of Ephesians: Rethinking Some Positions on the Basis of Schnackenburg and Arnold,” Neot 27 (1993): 93-106; Peter T. O'Brien, The Letter to the Ephesians (PNTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 4-47; Harold W. Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002), 2-61. The issues surrounding this citation are quite complex, though ultimately not relevant for our discussion; see Andrew T. Lincoln, "The Use of the OT in Ephesians," JSNT 14 (1982): 16-57; O’Brien, Ephesians, 205-208; and especially Moritz, Profound Mystery, 23-55. Compare Moritz’s conclusion: “While it would be unwarranted to call these verses [Eph 2:13-17] an exposition of Isaiah, the writer’s recourse to Isaiah was more than a mere borrowing of suitable theological language. Isa 57 and to a lesser extent ch 52 played a significant part in the shaping of Eph. 2:11ff. Probably this is even true of ch 56, albeit much more indirectly and certainly not in any linguistic sense” (Profound Mystery, 55). This is not a claim that the Hellenistic background of peace and reconciliation played no role in Paul’s understanding, but rather to argue for the primacy of the OT background in general, and the importance of Isa 40–66 in particular. See the discussion below, 236-38.


55

final prayer for the Galatian believers, Jew and Gentile alike, to experience the peace that is rightfully theirs as participants in God’s new creation, since they are in fact the Israel of God. The fact that Gal 6:16 contains an allusion to Isa 54:17 further bolsters this conclusion. 34 As a result, it seems at least possible that Paul’s salutation of “grace and peace” anticipates this climactic plea for the Galatian churches to recognize the sufficiency and finality of the salvation accomplished for them in Christ, the agent of new creation. These considerations converge to establish the strong possibility that Paul understands “peace” at least in part based on his reading of Isa 40–66. Our brief survey of “peace” in Isaiah (with particular emphasis on chs. 40–66) revealed its use as theological shorthand for the final state of well-being that will result from Yahweh’s salvation. Because Paul understands this salvation to have been accomplished by Jesus Christ’s death, resurrection, and exaltation, he can speak of peace as the present experience of the believer, while still recognizing that the full extent of peace awaits the triumphant return of Christ. Elsewhere Paul expresses these realities in the language of reconciliation, a concept that also has an already not yet dimension. The coherence of the Isaianic portrait of peace with that of Paul and the similar way in which the theme is developed strongly suggests that Isa 40–66 was a significant background in formulating his concept of peace. Given, then, the prominence that Isa 40–66 played in Paul’s understanding of peace, it seems likely that even a reference as formulaic as “grace and peace” in the salutation of an epistle retains an intrinsic connection to Paul’s larger theology of peace and may be regarded as a thematic parallel.35 Even more significant than the use of eivrh,nh in the salutation is the lengthy descriptive clause that follows the salutation. Seeking to draw attention to the person and work of Christ, Paul adds a clause that first expresses what Jesus did (tou/ do,ntoj eàuto.n u`pe.r tw/n a`martiw/n h`mw/n), followed by why Jesus did it (o[pwj evxe,lhtai h`ma/j evk tou/ aivwn/ oj tou/ evnestw/toj ponhrou/),36 and concluding with a statement of the norm that 34 35 36

See Gregory K. Beale, "Peace and Mercy upon the Israel of God," Bib 80 (1999): 204-23 and the discussion below, 236-38. Of course it must be reiterated that the language here in Gal 1:3 is formulaic, a factor that warrants caution in attributing too much significance to the Isaianic background of peace in this particular context. The verb evxaire,w is rather rare in the NT, appearing only seven other places (Matt 5:29; 18:9; Acts 7:10, 34; 12:11; 23:27; 26:17). Strikingly, none of these references is used to refer to the salvation accomplished by Jesus. In the LXX, it does occur twelve times in Isaiah (nine of which are in chs. 40–66) to refer to Yahweh delivering his people. The blind people of Israel are described as having no one to deliver them (42:22); in contrast no one can deliver out of Yahweh’s hand (43:13). Those who wor-

56


governed them both (kata. to. qe,lhma tou/ qeou/ kai. patro.j h`mw/n).37 Apparently Paul regarded it as essential to define Christ in this manner even at this early point in the letter, perhaps in anticipation of his argument in 3:13-14. Though not universally accepted, many scholars38 have recognized in 1:4 an allusion to Isaiah 53.39 Exactly where in Isaiah 53, however,

37 38

39

ship idols pray to them for deliverance (44:17; 57:13), but they cannot even deliver themselves (44:20). Not even the sorcerers of Babylon can deliver themselves from Yahweh’s judgment (47:12-14). Yahweh delivers his people from the furnace of affliction (48:10), defying those who doubt his ability to do so (50:2). These references are capped by Yahweh referring to himself as their savior and deliverer (60:16). Admittedly, both sw,|zw (18x) and rù,omai (15x) appear more often in Isa 40–66 than does evxaire,w (9x). Perhaps more significant is the use of evxaire,w in connection with the Exodus event. In addition to the references in Exodus (3:8; 18:4, 8-10), one finds such a use in Judg (A) 6:9; 1 Sam 10:18; Jer 41:13 (Eng = 34:13); and Acts 7:34. Scott goes so far as to claim that in Gal 1:4 evxaire,w “recalls God’s deliverance of Israel from the hands of the Egyptians”; see James M. Scott, "Paul's Use of Deuteronomic Tradition," JBL 112 (1993): 645-65, quote from 658. Such a claim, however, seems a bit of a stretch. The word evxaire,w by itself cannot carry that weight, since it is used in various ways in addition to referring to the Exodus; see François Bovon, "Une formule prépaulinienne dans l'Epître aux Galates (Ga 1:4-5)," in Paganisme, Judaïsme, Christianisme: Influences et Affrontements dans le Monde Antique: mélanges offerts à Marcel Simon (ed. Marcel Simon; Paris: E. de Boccard, 1978), 91-107, esp. 97-105. The most one can safely say is that the use of the verb here in Gal 1:4 is suggestive of a possible link to the larger motif of deliverance expressed in both the Exodus and the Second Exodus of Isa 40–66. The use of kata, + accusative to indicate the norm by which something is governed also appears in 1:11; 2:2 (kata, avpoka,luyin); 3:15; 3:29; 4:23; and 4:29. The final three are particularly significant for Paul’s argument. Among the commentaries, with varying levels of confidence, see F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 75; Richard B. Hays, “Galatians,” in New Interpreter’s Bible, vol. 11, 181348 (Nashville: Abingdon, 2000), 203; Richard N. Longenecker, Galatians (WBC 41; Dallas: Word, 1990), 7-8; Hans D. Betz, Galatians: A Commentary on Paul's Letter to the Churches in Galatia (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1979), 41-42; James D. G. Dunn, The Epistle to the Galatians (BNTC; Peabody: Hendrickson, 1993), 34-35; Simon Légasse, L'épître de Paul aux Galates (LD 9; Paris: Cerf, 2000), 52-53; Heinrich Schlier, Der Brief an die Galater (14th ed.; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1971), 32-33; Franz Mussner, Der Galaterbrief (HTKNT 9; Freiburg: Herder, 1974), 51; Joachim Rohde, Der Brief des Paulus an die Galater (THKNT 9; Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1989), 35-36. Outside the commentaries, see esp. Ciampa, Presence and Function, 111-17; Kim, Paul and the New Perspective, 101-102; Sandnes, Paul, 59-65; Pierre Grelot, Les poèmes du serviteur: de la lecture critique à l'herméneutique (LD 103; Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1981), 150-51. The possibility that Gal 1:4 contains a piece of early Christian tradition is often suggested; see, e.g., Wiard Popkes, Christus Traditus: Eine Untersuchung zum Begriff der Dahingabe im Neuen Testament (ATANT 49; Zürich: Zwingli Verlag, 1967), 193-204; Martin Hengel, The Atonement: The Origins of the Doctrine in the New Testament (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1981), 34-75; Victor Paul Furnish, "'He Gave Himself Up ....': Paul's Use of a Christological Assertion," in The Future of Christology: Essays in Honor of Leander E. Keck (ed. Abraham J. Malherbe and Wayne A. Meeks; Minneapolis:


57

remains debated, with the primary options being verses 5-6, 10, or 12. We will examine each of these possibilities before offering a synthesis. But before looking at which portion of Isa 53 Paul may be alluding to, we must first situate Isa 53 within its original context. Despite the enormous amount of disagreement regarding the particulars of Isa 52:13–53:12, there is general agreement that the passage holds a climactic position within Isa 49–55.40 As Cajot notes, “The fourth Song (52:13–53:12) is located between the final summons to participate in Yahweh's new exodus (esp. 52:9-12) and the expansive poem which describes the restoration of Zion-Jerusalem (54:1-17). The relationship between these two units appears to be that of promise and fulfillment. In this case, the intervening fourth Song should be considered as a link between promise and fulfillment.”41 Furthermore, there is also a general consensus on the internal structure of the passage itself.42 It divides naturally into three sections. 43 The opening section (52:13-15) functions as a prologue in which Yahweh announces the exaltation of his Servant and the astonishment he will provoke among the nations and their kings. The middle section extends

40

41 42

43

Fortress, 1993), 109-21; Cilliers Breytenbach, "Versöhnung, Stellvertretung und Sühne: Semantische und traditionsgeschichtliche Bemerkungen am Beispiel der paulinischen Briefe," NTS 39 (1993): 59-79; and Bovon, “Une formule prépaulienne,” 91-107. While not denying the possibility that Gal 1:4 may be a piece of traditional material, such a conclusion would not significantly alter the arguments presented here. The result would be to attribute the interpretive alterations to an earlier stage in the early Christian movement rather than Paul. Given the prominence of similar statements in Gal 2:20; Rom 4:25; 8:32; Eph 5:2, 25; 1 Tim 2:6; and Titus 2:14, Paul obviously has embraced the “tradition” as his own, and feels the freedom to express it differently depending on the demands of his argumentation. For a succinct discussion of the links between Isa 52:13–53:12 and the rest of Isa 49– 55, see Melugin, Formation, 168. On the significance of Isa 52:13–53:12 within Isa 40– 55, see Rikki E. Watts, "Consolation or Confrontation? Isaiah 40–55 and the Delay of the New Exodus," TynBul 41 (1990): 31-59; he rightly concludes that the location of Isa 52:13–53:12 within Isa 40–55 “suggests that the fourth song describes the way in which Yahweh’s ultimate agent, the unknown db,[,, will realize the New Exodus” (52). Compare the similar conclusion of William J. Dumbrell, "The Purpose of the Book of Isaiah," TynBul 36 (1985): 111-28, esp. 126. Rodel M. Cajot, "Second Isaiah's Servant of Yahweh Revisited," Philippinana Sacra 34 (1999): 201-18, quote from 216. One of the more careful structural analyses of Isa 52:13–53:12 may be found in David J. A. Clines, I, He, We and They: A Literary Approach to Isaiah 53 (JSOTSup 1; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1976). The focus of his approach rests upon analysis of the four different personae (“I,” “we,” “they,” and “he”); at the center is the “he” figure (i.e., the Servant). Where we depart from Clines is in his insistence upon the lack of any determinate meaning in the poem. For a different perspective that sees five different strophes, see Adrian Schenker, Knecht und Lamm Gottes (Jesaja 53): Übernahme von Schuld im Horizont der Gottesknechtslieder (SBS 190; Stuttgart: Verlag Kathollisches Bibelwerk GmbH, 2001), 67-69.

58


from 53:1-10,44 and expresses an unidentified group’s assessment of the Servant.45 In the conclusion (53:11-12) Yahweh expresses his intention to vindicate the Servant and his suffering on behalf of others.46 We are now in a position to examine which portion of Isa 53 Paul is alluding to, beginning with Isa 53:5-6.47 Isa 53:5-6 (MT)

5

Wn[evê 'Pm. i ll'xä om. ‘aWhw> rs:WÜ m Wnyten_ wO [O m] e aK'ÞdUm. Atàr"bux]b;W wyl'ê[' ‘Wnme’Alv. !aCoåK; ‘WnL'’Ku 6 `Wnl'(-aP'rn> I WnynI+P' AKßr>dl: . vyaiî Wny[iêT' !wOð[] taeÞ ABê [:yGIåp.hi ‘hw"hyw:) `WnL'(Ku

Isaiah 53:5-6 (LXX)

Galatians 1:4

auvto.j de. evtraumati,sqh dia. ta.j avnomi,aj h`mw/n kai. memala,kistai dia. ta.j a`marti,aj h`mw/n paidei,a eivrh,nhj h`mw/n evpV auvto,n tw/| mw,lwpi auvtou/ h`mei/j iva,qhmen 6 pa,ntej w`j pro,bata evplanh,qhmen a;nqrwpoj th/| o`dw/| auvtou/ evplanh,qh kai. ku,rioj pare,dwken auvto.n tai/j a`marti,aij h`mw/n

tou/ do,ntoj eàuto.n u`pe.r tw/n a`martiw/n h`mw/n( o[pwj evxe,lhtai h`ma/j evk tou/ aivw/noj tou/ evnestw/toj ponhrou/ kata. to. qe,lhma tou/ qeou/ kai. patro.j h`mw/n(

The similarity between the two rests in the double use of the plural of a`marti,a with the possessive pronoun h`mw/n, and the close parallels be44

45

46

47

Some scholars differ slightly on where this middle section ends. For the view that the middle section ends at 53:11a, see Claus Westermann, Isaiah 40–66: A Commentary (OTL; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1969), 255-57 and Brevard S. Childs, Isaiah (OTL; Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001), 411. By way of contrast, the break can also be made at 53:10a; see, e.g., Marjo C. A. Korpel and Johannes C. de Moor, The Structure of Classical Hebrew Poetry: Isaiah 40–55 (OtSt 41; Leiden: Brill, 1998), 57071. None of our conclusions here depend upon deciding the issue with certainty. For a helpful survey of the different views of the identity of the Servant, see Seizo Sekine, "Identity and Authorship in the Fourth Song of the Servant: A Redactional Attempt at the Second Isaiah Theology of Redemption, Part 1," AJBI 21 (1995): 29-56; for our own survey of the term db[ in Isa 40–66, see below, 70-75. John Walton suggests the intriguing possibility that “the imagery, background, and obscurities of the fourth servant song can be adequately resolved when the passage is read in the light of the substitute king ritual motifs known from Mesopotamia as early as the Isin period (early second millennium) and as late as Alexander the Great”; see John H. Walton, "The Imagery of the Substitute King Ritual in Isaiah's Fourth Servant Song," JBL 122 (2003): 734-43. If such a background is valid, it would lend weight to an individual interpretation of the servant. In passing here we may note that in Isa 53:11 the MT and LXX disagree on who is doing the justifying. The MT, along with both the Targum and the Qumran manuscripts, indicates that it is the Servant who justifies the many, whereas the LXX refers to God as the one who justifies the Servant. Although the reading of the MT is almost certainly original, it should be pointed out that 53:12 clearly refers to God’s vindication of the Servant, expressed in terms of granting spoil because of his sinbearing actions. For discussion of the textual issues, see Karl A. Tangberg, "The Justification of the Servant of the Lord: Light from Qumran on the Interpretation of Isaiah 53:11ab," TTK 72 (2001): 31-36. So Schlier, Galaterbrief, 32-33; Bruce, Galatians, 75; Ciampa, Presence and Function, 51-59.


59

tween a form of di,dwmi + reflexive pronoun in Gal 1:4 and a form of paradi,dwmi + personal pronoun in Isa 53:6. The difference between di,dwmi and paradi,dwmi is not inherently significant, since the two can be used somewhat interchangeably.48 More significantly, in Isa 53:6 the subject of the verb pare,dwken is ku,rioj, while in Gal 1:4 the subject of the participle do,ntoj is kuri,ou VIhsou/ Cristou/ (Gal 1:3). It is thus possible that Paul may have understood ku,rioj in Isa 53:6 as a reference to Jesus49 and subsequently made an interpretive adjustment to reflect this by changing the personal pronoun auvto,n to the explicitly reflexive pronoun eàuto,n.50 The difference between u`pe.r tw/n a`martiw/n h`mw/n (Gal 1:4) and tai/j a`marti,aij h`mw/n (Isa 53:6) can also be explained as an interpretive alteration.51 As a dative of respect, the phrase tai/j a`marti,aij h`mw/n has an ambiguous relationship to pare,dwken auvto,n (i.e., “the LORD gave him[self] with respect to our sins”). By substituting u`pe.r tw/n a`martiw/n h`mw/n for the ambiguous dative of respect,52 Paul has made explicit a substitutionary understanding of the death of Jesus that at best might be considered implicit in Isa 53:6. Often overlooked is the possibility that the allusion in Gal 1:4 originates in Isa 53:10.53 The parallels are quite suggestive.54 48 49 50

51 52

53 54

E.g. Deut 1:8; 1 Sam 28:19; possibly Luke 4:6; see below (100-2) in the discussion of Gal 2:20. This is the conclusion of Ciampa, Presence and Function, 53-54. While this is possible, the closer parallels found in Isa 53:10 make such a conclusion unlikely. “In the NT and pre-Christian papyri as in Hellenistic generally, even in the old colloquial Attic (but not class. Attic), the simple personal pronoun often serves as a reflexive” (Nigel Turner, Syntax vol. 3 of A Grammar of New Testament Greek by James H. Moulton [Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1963], 41, emphasis mine); cf. BDF §283, and A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (2d ed.; New York: Hodder & Stoughton, 1915), 687). A clear example of this usage in the NT is John 2:24, “But Jesus himself [auvto.j de. VIhsou/j] was not entrusting himself [auvto,n] to them because he knew all people.” For a discussion of the variant reading in Gal 1:4 that replaces u`pe,r with peri,, see note 58 below. An interesting parallel is found in Deut 24:16: “Fathers shall not be put to death for their children [u`pe.r te,knwn] and sons shall not be put to death for their fathers [u`pe.r pate,rwn]; each one shall be put to death for his own sin [th/| eàutou/ a`marti,a|].” In this final clause the phrase th/| eàutou/ a`marti,a| runs parallel to both u`pe,r clauses, showing that a dative of respect and a u`pe,r clause can have a close conceptual relationship. The closest someone comes to arguing for this is Grelot, Poèmes, 146. The textual variants in both the Greek and Hebrew make determining the original text quite challenging; for a discussion of the various readings, see Mitchell Dahood, "Textual Problems in Isaia," CBQ 22 (1960): 400-09; Mitchell Dahood, "Isaiah 53,8-12 and Masoretic Misconstructions," Bib 63 (1982): 566-70; Isaiah Sonne, "Isaiah 53:1012," JBL 78 (1959): 335-42; and Jan L. Koole, Isaiah III (Historical Commentary on the Old Testament; Leuven: Peeters, 1998), 2:322-23. As it stands, the MT (supported by 1QIsaa) reads ~yfiÛT', which can be a third feminine singular or a second masculine singular. If it is a third person form, then Avêp.n:

60


Isaiah 53:10 (MT)

‘AaK.D: #peÛx' hw"ùhyw: ‘~v'a' ~yfiTÛ '-~ai yliêx/h,( %yrIåa]y: [r;zyI Avêp.n: Adðy"B. hw"ßhy> #p,xeîw> ~ymi_y" `xl'(c.yI

Isaiah 53:10 (LXX) kai. ku,rioj bou,letai kaqari,sai auvto.n th/j plhgh/j eva.n dw/te peri. a`marti,aj h` yuch. u`mw/n o;yetai spe,rma makro,bion kai. bou,letai ku,rioj avfelei/n

Galatians 1:4 tou/ do,ntoj eàuto.n u`pe.r tw/n a`martiw/n h`mw/n( o[pwj evxe,lhtai h`ma/j evk tou/ aivw/noj tou/ evnestw/toj ponhrou/ kata. to. qe,lhma tou/ qeou/ kai. patro.j h`mw/n

There are three parallels: (1) the use of di,dwmi, (2) a prepositional phrase with a form of a`marti,a as its object, and (3) a reference to God’s will. Although both Gal 1:4 and Isa 53:10 use a form of di,dwmi, the forms are in fact noticeably different. Whereas Gal 1:4 has a masculine singular participle (do,ntoj), Isa 53:10 has a second person plural subjunctive (dw/te). The change from a subjunctive to a participle can be attributed to the new context, but the shift from a second person plural to a singular participle is not as easily explained.55 Paul may have altered the text himself on the basis of his conviction that the passage referred to Jesus, perhaps on the basis of his knowledge of the underlying Hebrew text. This possibility is strengthened when one considers that the Hebrew

55

would be the subject of the clause, resulting in a translation such as “his soul makes a guilt-offering.” By contrast, if ~yfiÛT' is a second person singular, the subject is unclear, though most likely Yahweh. The reading that results is along the lines of “you [Yahweh] make his soul a guilt-offering.” As noted above, the LXX reads dw/te, which although second person, is plural, making it unclear who is being addressed as “you.” But the probability of this verb being second person is significantly diminished by the lack of any other second person verbs in Isa 52:13-53:12; this is a passage dominated by the first and third persons. Because of these difficulties, some suggest emending the verb to a third masculine singular (~f;tu), producing a translation along the lines of “he [Yahweh? The Servant?] makes his soul/life [that of the Servant?] a guilt offering.” Within the broader textual tradition, the Syriac, Vulgate, and the Targum render the verb as third masculine singular. Perhaps even more significantly, 4QIsad appears to support this reading as well. The result, however, does not make the subject of the verb any clearer, since it could be Yahweh or the Servant. The fact that there are no other second person verbs in Isa 52:13-53:12 is in our minds decisive for the probability that ~yfiÛT' should be read as a third person singular (so also Koole, Isaiah III, 2:322-23). While this does not resolve whether it is better to regard Yahweh or the Servant as the subject of the verb, we have at least established the possibility of reading this text as a statement of the Servant’s giving of his own life as a guilt-offering. See the previous note for a discussion of the textual variants.


61

text can be read as saying “he made his soul a guilt-offering [Avêp.n: ‘~v'a' ~yfiÛT'].”56 Since the subject in Hebrew could be the Servant on such a reading, it is at least plausible that Paul understood this to be a reference to Jesus’ self-giving sacrifice on the cross. From that point it is not a large step to envision him rendering Avêp.n: into the reflexive pronoun eàuto,n, thus making explicit what he understood to be implicit in Isa 53:10.57 Although both Gal 1:4 and Isa 53:10 contain a preposition with a form of a`marti,a as its object, the difference between u`pe.r tw/n a`martiw/n (Gal 1:4) and peri. a`marti,aj (Isa 53:10) is substantive. 58 The construction u`pe,r + a form of a`marti,a as its object is rare in the LXX, appearing just five times, only one of which has a`marti,a in the plural.59 Of these five occurrences, two are used to supply a reason (1 Kgs 16:19; Psa 37:19), one has a substitutionary force (Mic 6:7), and the two in Ezekiel (40:39; 45:25) refer to the sin-offering (translating taJ'x;). In stark contrast, the combination of peri, + a form of a`marti,a as its object occurs 111x in the LXX, 74 of which are in Leviticus and Numbers. Most frequently this construction refers to the sin-offering, though it can also be used in the 56 57

58

59

See note 54 above. So too, Grelot, Poèmes, 146. For the possibility that Mark 10:45 reflects a similar transformation, see R. T. France, "The Servant of the Lord in the Teaching of Jesus," TynBul 19 (1968): 26-52; Douglas J. Moo, The Old Testament in the Gospel Passion Narratives (Sheffield: Almond, 1983), 122-27; Otto Betz, "Jesus and Isaiah 53," in Jesus and the Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins (ed. W. H. Bellinger and William R. Farmer; Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity Press, 1998), 70-87; and Watts, Isaiah’s New Exodus, 270-84. Interestingly, some significant manuscripts (e.g. P46, a*, A, and D) read peri, instead of u`pe,r (attested in, e.g., P51, a1, B and the Majority Text). On strictly external grounds, both readings have substantive and early support, making it difficult to make a decision on that basis. Fortunately, internal grounds provide more illumination. While the construction peri. a`marti,aj is attested in Rom 8:3, it is the only occurrence in the Pauline corpus. On the other hand, we find the phrase Cristo.j avpe,qanen u`pe.r tw/n a`martiw/n h`mw/n in 1 Cor 15:3, which Paul acknowledges as part of the core tradition of the early church. Decisive, however, is the parallel in Gal 2:20, where Paul describes the Son of God as parado,ntoj eàuto.n u`pe.r evmou/, which, as will be argued below, is an intentional reference back to 1:4 on Paul’s part. Given the internal evidence, then, it seems best to conclude that the original text of Gal 1:4 is in fact u`pe.r tw/n a`martiw/n. Perhaps the presence of peri, tw/n a`martiw/n can be explained by the effort of a scribe to bring the expression into explicit conformity with the more common LXX expression (and, perhaps, even specifically to Isa 53:10), thus making the link between Christ’s death and the sin-offering prescribed in the Law more explicit. Alternatively, one could also conclude that a scribe familiar with Pauline parallels in Gal 2:20 and 1 Cor 15:3 changed an original peri, to u`pe,r. If that were the case, the argument for an allusion to Isa 53:10 would only be strengthened. Most regard u`pe,r as original; see, e.g., Schlier, Galaterbrief, 32; R. Longenecker, Galatians, 8. Bovon, however, prefers peri, (“Une formule prépaulienne,” 92). 1 Kgs 16:19 (plural); Psa 37:19; Mic 6:7; Ezek 40:39; 45:25.

62


generic sense of “with respect / for / on behalf of sin.” 60 Here in Isa 53:10, however, it translates ~v'a', the word used for the guilt-offering, 61 something paralleled only one other place (Lev 5:7) in the LXX.62 One possible explanation for this unusual rendering is the strangeness of the Hebrew construction ~yf + ~v'a' as its direct object, found nowhere else in the MT.63 One possible explanation for Paul changing peri. a`marti,aj to u`pe.r tw/n a`martiw/n was a desire to avoid a reference to a specific type of offering and instead emphasize the broader notion of substitution reflected in the phrase u`pe.r tw/n a`martiw/n.64 Such an alteration would also explain the shift from the singular a`marti,aj to the plural a`martiw/n.65 A third line of evidence pointing to an allusion to Isa 53:10 is the reference to God’s will as the operative force behind the sacrificial 60

61

62 63

64

In Lev 5:6 these two usages occur within the same verse: “And he will offer a guilt offering for the sin [peri. th/j a`marti,aj] which he sinned, a female from the flock, a lamb, or a she-goat as a sin offering [peri. a`marti,aj] and the priest will make atonement for him [peri. auvtou/] for his sin [peri. th/j a`marti,aj auvtou/] which he sinned and the sin will be forgiven him.” The most common way that ~v'a' is rendered in the LXX when referring to the guiltoffering is a construction with either the noun plhmme,leia (23x) or its cognate verb plhmmele,w (4x). There is striking diversity in translating ~v'a' even within the same chapter; in Lev 5, e.g., ~v'a' is rendered five different ways. The unexpectedness of peri. a`marti,aj appears to have been recognized in some later manuscripts and corrected to peri, plhmmelei,aj (118’, 537, 125) to match the rest of the chapter. Although one does not find the verb ~yfi in sacrificial contexts, the meaning here is clear enough. The reason for this unusual verb may be linked to the importance of this verb in relation to the Servant in Isa 40–55. The Servant will not be deterred from his mission “until he establishes [~yfiîy"] justice in the earth” (42:4). Yahweh made [~f,Y"Üw:] the Servant’s mouth a sharp sword, and the Servant himself was made [ynIm’ye fiy>w:] into a polished arrow (49:2). Further strengthening the possibility of an allusion to Isa 53:10 is the fact that Isa 53:10 is one of only two places in the LXX where a form of the verb di,dwmi is modified by a prepositional phrase that has a form of a`marti,a as its object. The other is Mic 6:7, where because of the parallelism the verb is omitted in the second line, but is clearly implied. When Mic 6:7 and Isa 53:10 are compared in the LXX, there are remarkable similarities: Micah 6:7 eiv dw/ prwto,toka, mou avsebei,aj karpo.n koili,aj mou u`pe.r a`marti,aj yuch/j mou

65

Isaiah 53:10 eva.n dw/te peri. a`marti,aj h` yuch. u`mw/n o;yetai spe,rma makro,bion kai. bou,letai ku,rioj avfelei/n

No such parallels are seen in the MT, however; the two verses do not even share a single word in common in the sections compared above. Although Mic 6:7 shares an even closer verbal affinity to Gal 1:4 than Isa 53:10, the cumulative evidence indicates that the allusion is to Isa 53:10 and not Mic 6:7. The use of the plural of a`marti,a is considered by some to be strong evidence that this is in fact a piece of traditional material; for a discussion of this possibility, see n. 38 above.


63

death of the Servant. In Gal 1:4 this is accomplished by the phrase kata. to. qe,lhma tou/ qeou/ kai. patro.j h`mw/n,66 whereas in Isa 53:10 we find a reference to God’s will expressed differently within the textual tradition of the LXX. Textual Witness

Reading

Uncials

kai. ku,rioj bou,letai kaqari,sai auvto.n th/j plhgh/j eva.n dw/te peri. a`marti,aj hh` yuch. u`mw/no;yetai spe,rma makro,bion kai. bou,letai ku,rioj avfelei/n

Theodotion

kai. ku,rioj bou,letai kaqari,sai auvto.n th/j plhgh/j eva.n dw/te peri. a`marti,aj h` yuch. auvtou/ o;yetai spe,rma makro,bion kai. bou,letai ku,rioj avfelei/n

Aquila

Kai. Ku,rioj eboulhqh epitriyai autou to arrwsthma eva.n dw/te peri. a`marti,aj h` yuch. auvtou/ o;yetai spe,rma makro,bion kai boulhma kuriou en ceiri

Symmachus

ku,rioj hqelhsen alohsai auton en tw traumatismw eva.n dw/te peri. a`marti,aj h` yuch. autou o;yetai spe,rma makro,bion kai. Qelhma kuriou en ceiri autou euodwqhsetai

Determining the earliest reading is not easy, and for our purposes is not ultimately important. Each of these readings contains a reference to God’s will at the beginning and end of the verse, forming a sort of inclusio that encompasses the content of the entire verse. The result is a strong emphasis on God’s will as the governing norm of the actions of the Servant and the results that follow from them. And one cannot dis66

Although Paul frequently uses qe,lhma to refer to God’s will (Rom 1:10; 2:18; 12:2; 15:32; 1 Cor 1:1; 2 Cor 1:1; 8:5; Gal 1:4; Eph 1:1, 5, 9, 11; 5:17; 6:6; Col 1:1, 9; 4:12; 1 Thess 4:3; 5:18; 2 Tim 1:1), the phrase kata. to. qe,lhma tou/ qeou/ appears nowhere else in Paul (though compare the similar kata. th.n euvdoki,an tou/ qelh,matoj auvtou/ in Eph 1:5 and kata. th.n boulh.n tou/ qelh,matoj auvtou/ in Eph 1:11), and only one other place in the NT (1 Pet 4:19, cf. also the similar kata. to. qe,lhma auvtou/ in 1 John 5:14). The most common expression is dia, qelh,matoj (Rom 15:32; 1 Cor 1:1; 2 Cor 1:1; 8:5; Eph 1:1; Col 1:1; 2 Tim 1:1; note all but two of these are in the epistolary prescript and describe Paul’s apostolic office), but there is a good bit of diversity to the form of the references. The phrase kata. to. qe,lhma tou/ qeou/ appears nowhere in the OT, though it does occur in 1 Esd 8:16.

64


miss the possibility that Paul was familiar with a text containing a reading similar to that of Theodotion, the tradition that most closely matches the wording of Gal 1:4. But regardless of which reading(s) he may have been familiar with, the possibility remains that Paul made the explicit link between the self-sacrificial death of Jesus and God’s will based on his reading of Isa 53:10.67 Finally, some see the origin of the allusion in Gal 1:4 in Isa 53:12.68 Isaiah 53:12 (MT)

12

Alå-qL,x;a] !keúl' é~ymiWc[]-ta,w> ~yBiªr:b' rv,’a] tx;Tª; èll'v' qLeäx;y> Avêp.n: ‘tw<M'’l; hr"Û[/h, ‘aWhw> hn"+m.nI ~y[iÞv.Po-ta,w> af'ên" ~yBiär:-aj.xe s `[:yGI)p.y: ~y[iÞv.Pol;w>

Isaiah 53:12 (LXX) dia. tou/to auvto.j klhronomh,sei pollou.j kai. tw/n ivscurw/n meriei/ sku/la avnqV w-n paredo,qh eivj qa,naton h` yuch. auvtou/ kai. evn toi/j avno,moij evlogi,sqh kai. auvto.j aa`marti,aj pollw/n avnh,negken kai. dia. ta.j a`marti,aj auvtw/n paredo,qh

Galatians 1:4 tou/ do,ntoj eàuto.n u`pe.r tw/n a`martiw/n h`mw/n( o[pwj evxe,lhtai h`ma/j evk tou/ aivwn/ oj tou/ evnestw/toj ponhrou/ kata. to. qe,lhma tou/ qeou/ kai. patro.j h`mw/n(

This comparison reveals the obvious points of contact between the two passages. As noted above, the difference between di,dwmi and paradi,dwmi is sufficiently slight as to be of little significance in this context. It is said of the Servant in Isa 53:12 that “his soul was handed over to death [paredo,qh eivj qa,naton h` yuch. auvtou/],” which aligns nicely with Paul’s statement that Jesus “gave himself [do,ntoj eàuto,n],” an obvious reference to Jesus’ death. This idea is then repeated at the close of Isa 53:12, “he [or his soul] was handed over because of their sins [dia. ta.j a`marti,aj auvtw/n 67

68

The possibility of this allusion is further strengthened by a parallel line of thought found in 1 Peter. In 2:19-25, Christians are called to endure unjust suffering as part of God’s will after the example of Christ himself, whose sufferings are described in terms appropriated from Isa 53. Peter claims that Jesus “continually entrusted himself to the one who judges righteously [paredi,dou de. tw/| kri,nonti dikai,wj]” (2:23). Later in 4:19 Peter exhorts his readers “Let those who suffer according to the will of God [kata. to. qe,lhma tou/ qeou/] entrust their souls [paratiqe,sqwsan ta.j yuca.j auvtw/n] to a faithful Creator.” Additionally, God’s will as the governing norm of Jesus’ death is prominently mentioned by Peter in his Pentecost sermon; there he describes Jesus as the one “delivered over by the determined will [th/| w`risme,nh| boulh/|] and foreknowledge of God” (Acts 2:23). The presence of a similar logic in both 1 Peter and Galatians may suggest the existence of a broader tradition within early Christianity that Paul is drawing upon here. See, e.g., Rohde, Galater, 35; Hays, “Galatians,” 203.


65

paredo,qh].” This handing over of the servant’s soul to death is linked to “the sin of the many [a`marti,aj pollw/n]” as well as “their sin [ta.j a`marti,aj auvtw/n]” in Isa 53:12, and the phrase “our sins [tw/n a`martiw/n h`mw/n]” in Gal 1:4 captures both of these elements within its inclusive scope.69 The preceding analysis has explored three possible portions of Isa 53 from which Gal 1:4 may have been drawn. The volume of the verbal and syntactical data, combined with the recurrence of allusions to Isa 53 elsewhere here in Galatians and throughout the Pauline corpus suggest that an allusion to Isa 53 is in fact present in Gal 1:4. Despite most commentators seeing the allusion originating in Isa 53:6 or 53:12, the analysis given above suggests that if one specific portion of Isa 53 must be selected as the origin of the allusion, the closest parallels actually come from verse 10. In addition to the parallels between the two regarding the verb di,dwmi/paradi,dwmi and the noun a`marti,a, the reference to God’s will as the governing norm of the death of Jesus corresponds most clearly to the double reference to God’s will found in 53:10. Yet even if one is inclined to conclude that the allusion comes from 53:6 or 53:12 rather than 53:10, a more significant point should not be obscured. The fact that a plausible case can be made for an allusion to three different portions of the same passage of scripture indicates the probability that the allusion itself is to the totality of the passage rather than to just a specific line from it.70 Beyond the similarities in wording, the conceptual links are both substantive and relatively unique: a figure giving himself/being handed over with reference to the sins of God’s people. Naturally Gal 1:4 has more detail because the fulfillment of what Isa 53 pointed to had come in the person of Jesus. When one factors in the similar expressions found in Gal 2:20 (parado,ntoj eàuto.n u`pe.r evmou/; see below), Rom 4:25 (o]j paredo,qh dia. ta. paraptw,mata h`mw/n), 8:32 (u`pe.r h`mw/n pa,ntwn pare,dwken auvto,n), Eph 5:2 (pare,dwken eàuto.n u`pe.r h`mw/n), 5:25 (eàuto.n pare,dwken u`pe.r auvth/j), 1 Tim 2:6 (o` dou.j eàuto.n avnti,lutron u`pe.r pa,ntwn), and Titus 2:14 (o]j e;dwken eàuto.n u`pe.r h`mw/n), there should be little doubt that Isa 53 formed at least part of the conceptual background against which Paul understood the death of Jesus. The frequent appropriation of Isa 53 by other NT authors as well reveals a broad tradition within the early church of understanding the death of 69 70

The citation of Isa 53:12 in Luke 22:37 and the probable allusions to it in Heb 9:24; 1 Pet 2:24 further increase the possibility of an allusion here in Gal 1:4, and may provide additional evidence of a broader tradition within early Christianity. This conclusion is an example of Dodd’s claim that large sections of the OT were used by the NT authors, from which individual sentences were selected as pointers to the entirety of the passage; see Dodd, According to the Scriptures, 126.

66


Jesus in light of Isa 53.71 Finally, the discussions in Second Temple Jewish literature of Isa 53 reveal that this text had already been identified by some as messianic in nature,72 further increasing the probability that Isa 53 is fundamental to Paul’s understanding of Jesus’ death.

2.2.2 Galatians 1:6-10 These five verses mark a shift from the prescript of the letter to the body, with the notable absence of the typical Pauline thanksgiving. Paul expresses his astonishment that the Galatians are so rapidly turning away from the God proclaimed in his gospel.73 Central to this section 71 72

73

The list in “Loci Citati vel Allegati” in NA27 (789-93) indicates a total of 43 (7 in the Pauline writings) citations and allusions to Isa 53 within the NT, and that does not even include Gal 1:4; 2:20; Rom 8:32; Eph 5:2, 25; 1 Tim 2:6; or Titus 2:14! This is perhaps most clearly seen in the Targum of Isa 52:13, which reads “Behold, my servant, the Messiah [ax'yvim]. , will prosper; he will be lifted up and increase, and he will be very strong”; cf. 42:1 and 43:10. For a discussion of Isa 53 in STJ literature, see especially Martin Hengel, "Zur Wirkungsgeschichte von Jes 53 in vorchristlicher Zeit," in Der leidende Gottesknecht: Jesaja 53 und seine Wirkungsgeschichte (ed. Bernd Janowski and Peter Stuhlmacher; FAT 14; Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1996), 49-91; he concludes “daß es schon in vorchristlicher Zeit Traditionem über leidende und sühnende eschatologisch-messianische Gestalten im palästinischen Judentem (und wohl auch in der Diaspora, beides kann man nicht streng trennen) gegeben hat und daß Jesus und die Urgemeinde u.U. solche Traditionen kennen und daran anknüpfen konnten. Dies würde erklären, daß wohl schon Jesus selbst und dann seine Jünger nach Ostern voraussetzen konnten, daß die Botschaft vom stellvertretenden Sühnetod des Messias (1 Kor 15,3 f.) unter ihren jüdischen Volksgenossen verstanden würde” (91). See also Grelot, Poèmes, 118-37; Warren Joel Heard Jr., "Maccabean Martyr Theology: Its Genesis, Antecedents and Significance for the Earliest Soteriological Interpretation of the Death of Jesus" (Ph.D. diss., University of Aberdeen, 1987), 300-32; and George W. E. Nickelsburg, Resurrection, Immortality, and Eternal Life in Intertestamental Judaism (HTS 26; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1972), 61-80. Note, however, the salient caution of N.T. Wright: “It seems very unlikely . . . that there was a well-known pre-Christian Jewish belief, based on Isaiah 53, in a coming redeemer who would die for the sins of Israel and/or the world, such that Paul could simply slot Jesus into a ready-made framework” (Climax of the Covenant, 60). The seriousness of the situation to Paul is evident from his choice of vocabulary. The verb qauma,zw expresses astonishment, which in this context is clearly negative. Some (such as Betz, Galatians, 46-47, and R. Longenecker, Galatians, 11-15), citing parallels in broader Greek literature, see its use here as introducing a rebuke section. The two adverbs that follow (ou[twj and tace,wj) reinforce the severity, emphasizing the speed at which the situation had arisen. But most significant is the use of the verb metati,qhmi in the middle voice, which means “to have a change of mind in allegiance” (BDAG). The word could also be used to indicate a conversion from one philosophical school to another (see references cited in BDAG). A striking example of this usage is seen in 2 Macc 7:24, where Antiochus attempts to persuade a young Jewish man to turn from (metaqe,menon) the ways of his father (in other words, commit apostasy).


67

are Paul’s convictions that God had called the Galatians to himself, that the gospel has final authority (even over himself), and that Paul regards himself as a servant of Christ (Cristou/ dou/loj). As we shall see, the concepts of the gospel and being a slave of Christ both have roots in Isa 40– 66. In his efforts to expound the centrality of the gospel in Gal 1:6-9, Paul uses the verb euvaggeli,zw three times, and the noun euvagge,lion twice. In the rest of Galatians, euvaggeli,zw appears four times (1:11, 16, 23; 4:13), while there are five occurrences of euvagge,lion (1:11; 2:2, 5, 7, 14).74 As the distribution demonstrates, the concept of “gospel” is foundational to Gal 1–2, and Paul’s understanding of euvaggeli,zw / euvagge,lion has its roots in Isaiah 40–66.75

74 75

Notably here in Galatians, however, Paul does not seem to consider the Galatians as apostates quite yet, though they are certainly on that path. In the entire Pauline corpus, this word family appears a total of 81x, with the noun (60x) being far more prevalent than the verb (21x). By comparison, the word family appears just 49x elsewhere in the NT, 27 of which are in Luke-Acts. There is broad scholarly consensus that Paul’s use of euvaggeli,zw / euvagge,lion stems from his reading of Isa 40–66; see, e.g., U. Becker, “Gospel,” NIDNT, 2:107-15; Johan C. Beker, Paul the Apostle: The Triumph of God in Life and Thought (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980), 115-18; Joseph A. Fitzmyer, "The Gospel in the Theology of Paul," Int 33 (1979): 339-50; A. Boyd Luter, "Gospel," in DPL (ed. Gerald F. Hawthorne and Ralph P. Martin; Downers Grove: IVP, 1993), 369-72; Peter T. O'Brien, Gospel and Mission in the Writings of Paul: An Exegetical and Theological Analysis (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995), 77-81. A nuanced version of this conclusion is found in Ciampa (Presence and Function, 89-90), who argues that while the word euvaggeli,zw / euvagge,lion as used by Paul has its roots particularly in Isaiah, the content of the gospel is taken from the larger message of the prophets, oriented around his understanding that “the eschatological age of salvation . . . had been inaugurated by Christ.” As such, euvaggeli,zw / euvagge,lion function as a shorthand “for the eschatological message of salvation which is (according to Paul’s understanding) at the core of the prophetic message of the whole of Scripture.” On the one hand, Ciampa is certainly right to assert that the content of the Pauline euvagge,lion cannot be restricted to Isa 40–66, but at the same time he appears to underestimate the thematic links that establish the importance of Isa 40–66 in particular for Paul’s understanding of the gospel. Disagreement centers on the extent to which he was also influenced by the secular use of the terms. By arguing for the Isaianic background of euvaggeli,zw / euvagge,lion, we are not claiming that the broader use of the terms in secular Greek played no role in Paul’s understanding. Indeed, N.T. Wright has argued persuasively that Paul used the term not only because of its Isaianic background, but specifically because of its use in Greek culture within the emperor cult. As Wright understands it, the contexts in which the term is used in Isaiah speak of the enthronement of Yahweh and his Servant King. Consequently, when Paul proclaimed the “good news” of Jesus as King he was at the same time proclaiming that Caesar was not. “The more Jewish we make Paul’s ‘gospel,’ the more it confronts directly the pretensions of the imperial cult, and indeed all other paganisms whether ‘religious’ or ‘secular’”; see N. T. Wright, What Saint Paul Really Said: Was Paul of Tarsus the Real Founder of Christianity? (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 44.

68


Other than the nine uses in 1–2 Samuel,76 Isaiah has the most occurrences (six — 40:9 [2x]; 52:7 [2x]; 60:6; 61:1) of euvaggeli,zomai / euvagge,lion, all of which are in Isa 40–66.77 Even more important than the number of references is where they occur. In 40:1-8, Yahweh announces comfort to his people, assuring them that his glory will be seen by all flesh. God’s people can be confident in this announcement because of the eternal nature of God’s word. In response to this (40:9), both Zion and Jerusalem are instructed to proclaim this salvation and are described as bearers of good news (o` euvaggelizo,menoj in the LXX). Similarly, in 52:1-6 Zion/Jerusalem are summoned to throw off their chains of oppression because Yahweh has taken decisive action to redeem them. Isaiah 52:7 then shifts to a description of the one who announces this salvation. This herald is twice described in 52:7 with the participle of euvaggeli,zomai in the LXX; he “proclaims the good news of the message of peace” (euvaggelizome,nou avkoh.n eivrh,nhj), as well as “proclaims the good news of good things” (euvaggelizo,menoj avgaqa,). The content of the good news is that Yahweh reigns, resulting in God comforting his people (52:9) and baring his arm in the sight of all the nations (52:10). The language of the arm of Yahweh returns in 53:1, where it is parallel to the Servant in 53:2ff. The implication is that the announcement of the good news that God has redeemed his people results from the work of the Servant in Isa 52:13–53:12.78 While the final two occurrences do not follow this same pattern, they are instructive. In 60:1-3, the prophet announces the salvation of Zion in terms of the light/glory of Yahweh shining upon her, with the result that nations and kings will flock to Jerusalem. Among those will be people from Sheba, who will not only bring gold and frankincense, but will also “proclaim the good news of the salvation of the Lord [to. swth,rion kuri,ou euvaggeliou/ntai]” (60:6). The final occurrence is in 61:1,79 76

77

78 79

All nine of these (1 Sam 31:9; 2 Sam 1:20; 4:10 [2x]; 18:19, 20 [2x], 26, 31) are used in the context of announcing good news, generally of military victory. Outside of 1–2 Sam and Isaiah, euvaggeli,zomai / euvagge,lion appears an additional eight times: 1 Kgs 1:42; 1 Chr 10:9; Psa 39:10 [Eng = 40:9]; 67:12 [Eng = 68:11]; 95:2 [Eng = 96:2]; Joel 3:5 [Eng = 2:32]; Nah 2:1 [Eng = 1:15]; Jer 20:15. Of these additional eight, four (1 Kgs 1:42; 1 Chr 10:9; Psa 67:12; Jer 20:15) are used in the same generic sense found in 1–2 Sam, while the other four are endued with salvific significance. To be precise, the noun euvagge,lion does not appear in Isaiah (indeed it occurs only in 2 Sam 4:10 in the entire LXX). However, it is apparent that Paul’s use of this noun is drawn from the verb euvaggeli,zomai, and thus they will be treated together. Each of the six occurrences in Isa 40–66 translates the verb rfb, which has significant semantic overlap with euvaggeli,zomai. The possibility that Paul observed this connection is supported by the fact that Paul quotes Isa 52:7 in Rom 10:15 followed by a citation of Isa 53:1 in Rom 10:16. For discussion of the original context of Isa 61:1-11, see below, 158-60.


69

where an unspecified Spirit-endued figure claims to have been anointed “to preach good news to the poor [euvaggeli,sasqai ptwcoi/j].”80 Notably, these six occurrences are all linked to the eschatological intervention of Yahweh to save his people, often expressed in terms of Yahweh comforting his people (40:9; 52:7).81 Of these four passages, Isa 52:7 appears to have been particularly significant to Paul. He explicitly cites it in Rom 10:15 in reference to those who proclaim the good news of salvation in Jesus Christ 82 and likely alludes to it in his description of the Christian’s armor in Eph 6:15. An examination of the larger context of Isa 52:7 reveals why this passage would have been so attractive to Paul, as one finds several themes developed by Paul in Galatians. The proclamation of good news is explicitly linked to peace (Isa 52:7 // Gal 1:3; 6:16), and has as its aim not merely Israel but the nations as well (Isa 52:10 // Gal 1:16; 2:2; 3:14). This good news of salvation requires a response of faith (Isa 53:1 // Gal 3:2) because it is accomplished by Yahweh’s servant on behalf of his people (Isa 53:4, 6, 10, 12 // Gal 1:4; 2:20; 3:13). God’s saving action is in continuity with his promise to Abraham and Sarah to bless all the nations of the earth (Isa 51:2-3 // Gal 3–4). Finally, an essential element of this good news is the revelation of God’s arm (Isa 52:10; 53:1 // Gal 1:12,

80

81

82

In Luke 4:16-30, Isaiah 61:1-2 is presented as a formative passage for Jesus’ understanding of his mission. Luke’s desire to present Jesus’ ministry within the framework of Isa 61:1-2 may have even led Luke to use euvaggeli,zw/euvagge,lion in 1:19 (Gabriel’s announcement to Mary), 2:10 (the angel’s announcement to the shepherds), and 3:18 (John the Baptist’s proclamation). For the significance of this passage within the structure of Luke-Acts, see Pao, Acts, 71-84. From the available sources, there is little evidence from the Second Temple period for the usage of euvaggeli,zw/euvagge,lion endued with the strong salvific sense shown in Isaiah. All sixteen occurrences in Josephus, as well as the eleven in Philo, have the generic sense of good news. The clearest example of a salvific use of euvaggeli,zw / euvagge,lion in the Second Temple period outside of the LXX is Pss. Sol. 11:1 — “Sound a trumpet in Zion as a signal for the holy ones; proclaim in Jerusalem the voice of one announcing good news [euvaggelizome,nou] that God has been merciful to Israel by watching over them.” The psalm goes on to speak of God gathering his people from the ends of the earth, making a path for them through the wilderness. The entire psalm is saturated with Isaianic language; for discussion, see Kenneth Atkinson, An Intertextual Study of the Psalms of Solomon (SBEC 49; Lewiston, N.Y: E. Mellen Press, 2001), 223-35. At Qumran, the root rfb occurs twelve times, all of which appear to in some way to relate to Isa 52:7 (or the close parallel Nah 2:1); 60:1-3; 61:1-3. As a result, the salvific/eschatological sense is often present; the most notable example is 11Q13, where the messenger of Isa 52:7 is identified with the anointed one of Dan 9:25. On this text, see above, 50 n. 17. Interestingly, in Rom 10:15 Paul changes the singular of Isa 52:7 to a plural, likely to include all proclaimers of the gospel as prefigured there. For a helpful discussion of Isa 52:7 in Rom 10:15, see Wagner, Heralds, 170-80.

70


15-16), which Paul may have equated with Christ as the Servant.83 More thematic connections could be cited, but these suffice to show that when Paul read Isa 49–54 he saw numerous elements of his gospel message foretold there, and as a result understood his call to preach the good news to the Gentiles against this backdrop. Consequently, there should be little doubt that Isa 40–66 played a prominent role in Paul’s use of euvaggeli,zomai / euvagge,lion. The coherence between the Isaianic use of euvaggeli,zomai and that found in Paul, combined with the recurrence of the term elsewhere in Galatians and in the rest of his letters, often in contexts where he is quoting from or alluding to Isaiah, establishes the probability of a thematic parallel here in Galatians. For Paul, now that Christ had come as savior and king, the time had come to announce this good news to both Jew and Gentile alike. When Paul heard news of others at work in the Galatian communities proclaiming a message that was out of step with his understanding of the gospel, his response should not surprise us. To depart from the true gospel, as revealed to him through his encounter with Jesus Christ, was to pursue destruction, just as those who refused to respond to the Isaianic heralds would remain in their sin-induced stupor (Isa 51:17-23). When we reach the conclusion of the prescript in Gal 1:10, we find Paul rejecting any desire on his part to be a people-pleaser when it comes to preaching the gospel. In the apodosis of the second-class conditional clause that concludes the verse, Paul uses a familiar selfdesignation: Cristou/ dou/loj.84 While various suggestions have been made as to the background of this designation,85 the OT must be consi83

84

85

It is true that Paul does not use the expression “arm of the Lord [braci,wn kuri,ou]” anywhere in his writings, but it is not a significant leap to conclude that Paul may have equated the “arm of the Lord” spoken of in Isa 52:10 and 53:1 and the Servant described in Isa 52:13-53:12, as do some modern commentators; see, e.g., Koole, Isaiah III, 2:277-78; Motyer, Prophecy, 427. In John 12:37-38, the author appears to identify Jesus with the arm of the Lord revealed in Isa 53:1, so we cannot exclude the possibility that Paul saw a similar connection. See the discussion below (80-82) on the possibility that the language of Isa 53:1 may be echoed in Gal 1:12, 15-16. Paul uses dou/loj to refer to himself five times (Rom 1:1; Gal 1:10; Phil 1:1; 2 Cor 4:5; Titus 1:1). This title is further extended to his fellow missionary partners (2 Cor 4:5; Phil 1:1; Col 4:12; 2 Tim 2:24), believers in general (Rom 6:19; 1 Cor 7:22; Eph 6:6), as well as Christ himself (Phil 2:7). For recent treatments of slavery metaphors in Paul, see Dale B. Martin, Slavery as Salvation: The Metaphor of Slavery in Pauline Christianity (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990); Murray J. Harris, Slave of Christ: A New Testament Metaphor for Total Devotion to Christ (NSBT 8; Downers Grove: IVP, 2001)54-61, 139-56; John Byron, Slavery Metaphors in Early Judaism and Pauline Christianity: A Traditio-Historical and Exegetical Examination (WUNT 162; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003); Sam Tsang, A New Rhetoric Analysis on Paul's Slave Metaphors in His Letter to the Galatians (SBL 81; New York: Peter Lang, 2005).

71


dered as part of the picture. The word db,[, is, of course, used in a general sense to refer to a servant or slave, but could also refer to someone (such Abraham, Moses, David, or even Cyrus) who had a special relationship with God and/or a special task to perform for him. As one traces the term throughout the Old Testament, one discovers that the term eventually came to refer to prophets as servants of Yahweh, who expressed their dependence upon him for their message and actions.86 But when we turn to examine Isa 40–66, db,[, takes on a special importance at key points.87 A survey of these chapters reveals that the 86

The use of db,[, by the Teacher of Righteousness in the Hodayot may reflect this type of usage (see, e.g., 1QHa 4:11, 23-26; 6:8, 11, 25; 8:19-23, 27). However, in 1QH a 15 there are indications that the Teacher of Righteousness may have in fact thought of himself in terms of the Isaianic servant of ch. 49. The hymn begins (15:6) with an expression of thanks to the Lord for being upheld “by your strength [hkzw[b]” (cp. the Servant’s words in Isa 49:5 — “my God is my strength [yZI)[u hy"ïh' yh;Þl{aw]”) and for the Lord “pouring out your Holy Spirit upon me [yb htwpynh hkXdšwq xwrw]” (cp. the description of the Servant in Isa 42:1 – “I have put my Spirit upon him [wyl'ê[' ‘yxiWr yTit;Ûn"]”). Several verses later (15:16) the author cries out to the Lord, “you know the form of your Servant [hkdb[ rcy ht[dy htaw],” words that may recall Isa 49:1 — “And now, says Yahweh, who formed me in the womb to be his Servant [Alê db,[,äl. ‘!j,B’m , i yrIÜc.yO hw"©hy> rm:aå ' ŸhT'[ä w; >].” Finally, in 15:19-20, the author says to the Lord, “in your righteousness you appointed me for your covenant [hktyrbl yOntdm[h hktqdcÎb],” language that may echo Isa 49:8, where Yahweh says to the Servant, “I appointed you for a covenant to the people [~['ê tyrIåb.li ‘^n>T,a,w>].” While none of these individual examples may be persuasive by themselves, their cumulative weight at least establishes the possibility that Isa 49:1-8 is part of the intertextual background to the Teacher of Righteousness’s self-description. The literature on this subject is enormous. For surveys of the various views, see, e.g., Christopher R. North, The Suffering Servant in Deutero-Isaiah: An Historical and Critical Study (2nd ed; London: Oxford University Press, 1956); Colin G. Kruse, "The Servant Songs: Interpretive Trends Since C. R. North," SBT 8 (1978): 3-27; Herbert Haag, Der Gottesknecht bei Deuterojesaja (EdF 233; Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1985); Bernd Janowski and Peter Stuhlmacher, eds., The Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 in Jewish and Christian Sources (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004). For helpful bibliographies of works dealing with the identity of the Servant in Isa 40–66, see Joseph Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40–55: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 19a; New York: Doubleday, 2002), 166-74 and Janowski & Stuhlmacher, Suffering Servant, 462-92. The origin of isolating Isa 42:1ff.; 49:1ff.; 50:4ff.; 52:13-53:12 as distinct “Servant Songs” may be traced back to Bernhard Duhm, Die Theologie der Propheten (Bonn: Marcus, 1875) and Bernhard Duhm, Das Buch Jesaia (Göttingen Handkommentar zum Alten Testament III/1; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1892). From those beginnings scholarship has diversified into a broad range of proposals regarding the origin, nature, extent and significance of these passages, as a review of the sources just listed makes clear. Here we may also note that although we will use the phrase “Servant Songs” in our study, we do not regard them as distinct units that had an existence separate from Isaiah (as Duhm did); instead they must be assessed within their context in Isaiah. For a similar view with supporting argumentation, see North, Suffering Servant, 156-60; Harry M. Orlinsky, The So-Called 'Servant of the Lord' and 'Suffering Servant' in Second Isaiah (VTSup 14; Ledien: Brill, 1967), 12-16; note also George A. F. Knight, Servant Theology: A Commentary on the Book of Isaiah 40–55 (ITC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), 2-3.

E

87

72


word has at least four different referents: Israel/Jacob as a nation, the remnant, Gentile converts, and most significantly, an unspecified figure called by God to accomplish his purposes.88 Consequently, only the context can determine how the term is being used, and not surprisingly in several places the precise sense of db,[, is hotly debated. However, a careful examination of its use in Isa 40–66 reveals an intriguing pattern that is germane to our discussion here.89 The word first appears in 41:8-9, where it clearly refers to the nation of Israel; they are told not to fear because of Yahweh’s promise to strengthen them. In Isa 42:1-9, the mission of the servant (again, the nation) is laid out:90 a light to the nations, opening blinded eyes, and bringing freedom to those imprisoned (42:6-7). Yet later within that same chapter (42:18-25), the servant (the nation) is described as blind and deaf, plundered as a result of their sin against Yahweh. In 43:10, Yahweh again addresses the nation as db,[,, also in the context of the nation’s blindness. A different note is struck in 44:1-2, where the nation is called “servant,” but this time in the midst of Yahweh assuring them of his election of them and his ongoing concern for them. The same note resonates in 44:21-22, this time with specific reference to Yahweh blotting out their sins. The word occurs in 44:26, but here it seems to refer to the prophet(s), as indicated by the parallelism. So precious is the servant ( = nation) in 45:4 that God even raises up the pagan king Cyrus to effect her redemption.91 The use of db,[, to refer to the nation 88

89 90

91

Our own breakdown is as follows: Israel/Jacob (41:8-9; 42:1?; 42:19; 43:10; 44:1-2,21; 45:4; 48:20; 63:17), an unspecified figure (42:1?; 44:26; 49:3, 5, 6, 7; 50:10; 52:13; 53:11), the remnant (54:17; 65:8-9, 13-15; 66:14), and Gentile converts (56:6). In chs. 1-39, db,[, is applied to Isaiah (20:3), Eliakim the son of Hilkiah (22:20), and David (37:35). Albeit with different conclusions, see also the survey in Blenkinsopp, “Servant and Servants,” 155-76. In contrast to the view laid out here, Richard L. Schultz (“Servant, Slave,” NIDOTTE 4:1195-96) regards the Servant in Isa 42:1ff. as an individual who is contrasted with Israel who is blind and deaf (42:18ff.). Although this view is possible, we are not persuaded that there are clear textual indications that a change in referent for the term db,[, is intended. Even if Schultz is correct, however, our argument is not substantially affected; it would simply mean that the ideal Servant is introduced in 42:1ff in anticipation of its development in Isa 49–55. For a helpful detailing of the verbal connections between Isa 42:1-9 and Isa 11:1-10, see Benjamin D. Sommer, A Prophet Reads Scripture: Allusion in Isaiah 40–66 (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1998), 8488. Several scholars have argued that Cyrus is presented as the Servant in Isa 40–55; see, esp. Antti Laato, The Servant of YHWH and Cyrus: A Reinterpretation of the Exilic Messianic Programme in Isaiah 40–55 (CB 35; Stockholm, Sweden: Almqvist & Wiksell International, 1992). While not denying that parallels may be drawn between language applied to Cyrus and the Servant, some descriptions of the Servant’s role and activity do not fit Cyrus well, such as the prophetic and self-sacrificial aspects of the Servant’s work; for a succinct summary of the difficulties, see G. P. Hugenberger, "The


73

reaches its culmination in 48:20, where Yahweh instructs the nation to exclaim “Yahweh has redeemed his servant Jacob!”92 However, a shift takes place in how db,[, is used when we come to Isa 49.93 Four times in 49:1-7 db,[, is used, but the context indicates a reference to an individual rather than the nation. Most compelling is the fact that this servant has a mission to “restore the preserved ones of ' . laeÞr"f.yI yrEîWcn>W]” (Isa 49:6). The question naturally arises as to Israel [byvi_hl how the nation, described as blind and deaf thus far, could possibly restore the preserved ones of Israel (i.e. the remnant). The answer is that instead of db,[, referring to the nation, here it refers to an individual who is described in terms taken from earlier descriptions of the servant as the nation of Israel.94 In other words, because the nation has failed to fulfill her commission as the servant of Yahweh to be a light to the nations, God raises up an individual servant to fulfill that commission in her stead.95 Throughout the remainder of chs. 49–53, db,[, refers exclusively to this individual who now fulfills the commission of the servant. The Servant speaks again in 50:4-9, and in contrast to the disobedient people (50:1-3), he is not rebellious (50:5), but endures suffering because he trusts in Yahweh’s vindication (50:6-9). In 52:13–53:12 the description of this individual Servant reaches its climax with a description

92

93

94 95

Servant of the Lord in the 'Servant Songs' of Isaiah: A Second Moses Figure," in The Lord's Anointed: Interpretation of Old Testament Messianic Texts (ed. P. E. Satterthwaite, Richard S. Hess, and Gordon J. Wenham; Tyndale House Studies; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995), 105-39, esp. 115-18. For a similar analysis, see Watts, “Consolation,” and especially John Goldingay, "The Arrangement of Isaiah xli-xlv," VT 29 (1979): 289-99, who after identifying the Servant in Isa 42 as the nation of Israel goes on to note “the role attributed to the servant in xlii 1-4 is one which Israel herself is in no position to fulfill. The servant is to establish mišPä†; but Israel has mišPä† problems of her own (xl 27). . . . It is, I think, because Israel cannot fulfill the servant role which is her responsibility, that the identity of the servant which was explicit in chapter xli is open in chapter xlii. The picture of the servant has become a role seeking for someone to fulfill it” (292, emphasis mine). Watts (“Consolation,” 53-56), while noting the similar language describing the servant in Isa 40–48 and that in Isa 49–53, points out four crucial differences: (1) servant Jacob-Israel is blind, deaf and unresponsive (42:18-22) while the unknown servant hears and obeys God’s instruction (50:4-5); (2) servant Jacob-Israel lacks faith and criticizes Yahweh’s dealings (40:27-31), while the unknown servant trusts Yahweh to vindicate him (50:7-9); (3) servant Jacob-Israel deserves punishment for sin (43:2528), but the unknown servant is innocent (50:5-9; 53:9); (4) servant Jacob-Israel suffers at the hands of the nations (42:23-25) whereas the unknown servant is spurned by his own people (49:4; 50:8; 53:8). See also Orlinsky, So-Called, 23-51. Compare Isa 42:1-8 with 49:1-8. Cp. the similar conclusion of Watts (“Consolation,” 55) — “In cognizance of the individual traits of the db,[,, it would appear that true Israel has been reduced to one (cf. 53:6 and ch. 48).” On the individuality of the Servant here, see also North, Suffering Servant, 205-7, 216-17.

74


of his vicarious suffering for the sins of the people, accomplishing the redemption that Yahweh had promised his people. A final shift takes place from ch. 54 through the end of Isaiah: db,[, refers to those who have experienced Yahweh’s salvation. The first example is found in Isa 54:17, the climax of a chapter that celebrates the redemption accomplished by the individual Servant in Isa 53. Yahweh refers to the blessings that accompany this redemption as “the inheritance of the servants of Yahweh [hw"ôhy> ydE’b.[],” which is amplified further in the following line as “their righteousness/vindication [ ~t'q'd>ciw>] from me” (54:17). The same language of vindication is found in reference to the Servant in 50:8 and 53:11, leading to the conclusion that the vindication experienced by the Servant based on his vicarious sufferings has now been extended to all who respond to Yahweh’s offer of redemption. From this point forward in Isaiah, the noun db,[, appears only in the plural, and refers to those who have experienced Yahweh’s salvation.96 Or, as one commentator succinctly states, “The saving work of the Servant creates servants.”97 The result of our survey has been to demonstrate that in Isa 40–66, the term db,[, is used in the singular in Isa 40–48 to refer to the nation of Israel and her commission as a light to the Gentiles. Yet this Servant is so blind and deaf as to have failed in this commission. As a result, Yahweh raises up a new Servant in Isa 49–53, an individual who fulfills the commission where the nation had failed, culminating in his vicarious suffering for the sins of the people. Those who have experienced Yahweh’s salvation in Isa 54–66 are now referred to as servants (plural) because they have responded to Yahweh’s offer of redemption, and are reflections of his glory to the ends of the earth.98 When we consider how the LXX renders db,[, in Isa 40–66, several words are used: pai/j (15x), dou/loj (7x), doule,w (7x), qerapeu,w (once), and

;

96 97

98

Isa 54:17; 56:6 (referring to Gentile converts); 63:17; 65:8, 9, 13 (3x), 14, 15; 66:14. Motyer, Prophecy, 451. One may also compare the similar conclusion of Watts — “it is significant that from chapter 49 on up until after the db,[’, s realization of the New Exodus (54:1ff.), the term db,[, is not clearly applied to anyone except the enigmatic figure under consideration. But, and this is the crucial point, immediately following the description of the renewed Jerusalem-Zion and the well-being of her children (54:13ff.), and for the first and only time in 40–55, the plural term hw"ôhy> ydE’b.[; appears (v. 17). The expression refers to those Israelites who have been returned to Yahweh (49:5f) and suggests that the db,[, terminology can now be applied to that group which has been restored to Israel’s original calling as a result of the ‘unknown’ db,[,’s work. No longer is there just one db,[,, and Yahweh is thus shown to remain faithful to his election of Israel” (“Consolation,” 55). For a similar understanding of the use of db,[, in Isa 40–55, see Oswalt, Isaiah 40–66, 287 n. 14.


75

se,bw (once).99 Careful examination reveals that in Isa 40–53, db,[, is consistently (15 of 20 times) translated by pai/j; the five exceptions are either a form of dou/loj (48:20; 49:3, 5, 7) or doule,w (53:11). In chs. 54–66, however, pai/j disappears, and doule,w and dou/loj account for nine of the eleven occurrences.100 What then does this have to do with Paul’s reference to himself as Cristou/ dou/loj? By itself the use of dou/loj is not terribly significant, but when the broader context is considered, there is reason to suspect that Paul uses the term dou/loj in anticipation of his allusions to Isa 49:1-8 later in the chapter.101 This possibility is strengthened by the fact that dou/loj occurs in 49:3 and 49:5 in reference to the Servant, the only places in the Servant Songs where db,[, is rendered as dou/loj. Additionally, as will be argued below, in addition to the allusions to Isa 49 found in Gal 1:15-16, there are additional echoes of that text that reverberate into chapter two.102 Thus, on an initial examination of the phrase Cristou/ dou/loj, one might easily miss an echo of the Servant figure from Isa 49– 53, but when the larger context of Gal 1–2 is considered, one should not quickly dismiss the possibility that Paul is anticipating his discussion of his apostolic call, a call which is described in terms borrowed from Isa 49. The volume of Isaianic allusions and echoes throughout Gal 1–2 suggests that at the least we may consider the phrase Cristou/ dou/loj as a thematic parallel to the Servant figure of Isaiah, and that perhaps echo is too strong a category for a relationship that cannot be narrowed down to a particular text, since at most we find only one word (dou/loj) in common with several Isaianic texts.

2.2.3 Galatians 1:11-24 Having completed the prescript, Paul now moves to assert the divine origin of his gospel message as well as his commission to proclaim that The breakdown is as follows: pai/j (41:8, 9; 42:1, 19 [2x]; 43:10; 44:1, 2, 21 [2x], 26; 45:4; 49:6; 50:10; 52:13); dou/loj (48:20; 49:3, 5, 7; 56:6; 63:17; 65:9); doule,w (53:11; 65:8, 13 [3x], 14, 15); qerapeu,w (54:17); and se,bw (66:14). 100 For an attempt to discern a difference between the use of pai/j and dou/loj in Isa 40–66, see Eugene R. Ekblad, Isaiah's Servant Poems According to the Septuagint: An Exegetical and Theological Study (CBET 23; Leuven: Peeters, 1999), 97-99. 101 Those who have raised this possibility include David M. Stanley, "The Theme of the Servant of Yahweh in Primitive Christian Soteriology, and its Transposition by St. Paul," CBQ 16 (1954): 385-425; Beker, Paul the Apostle, 115; Wilk, Bedeutung des Jesajabuches, 365; and Ciampa, Presence and Function, 93-94. Of these four, Ciampa makes the most substantive argument for an echo of Isa 49. 102 See discussion below, 87-90. 99

76


gospel among the Gentiles (1:11-12). After briefly mentioning his former life in Judaism (1:13-14), Paul relates how God revealed Christ to him (1:15-16), resulting in a radical reorientation of his life. What follows is a selective recounting of his activities in the years that followed this revelation, oriented around his interaction with the church in Jerusalem (1:17-24). Numerous scholars have argued that Paul alludes to Isa 49 in Gal 1:15-16,103 but as we shall see, he also draws upon other portions of Isa 40–66 within Gal 1:11-24 to describe his encounter with Christ, his subsequent commission as apostle to the Gentiles, and even the results of his ministry. We begin with an examination of Gal 1:15-16, where the greatest density of Isaianic allusions and echoes occurs. Paul begins by asserting that God delighted (euvdo,khsen) to reveal his Son to him, a notion that may originate in Isa 42:1.104 Isaiah 42:1 (MT)

ABê-%m't.a, ‘yDIb[. ; !hEÜ yTit;Ûn" yvi_p.n: ht'äc.r" yrIßyxiB. ~yIïAGl; jP'Þv.mi wyl'ê[' ‘yxiWr àyciA( y 1

Isaiah 42:1 (LXX [Q])105 idou o` pai/j mou avntilh,myomai auvtou/ o` evklekto,j mou o[n euvdo,khsen h` yuch, mou e;dwka to. pneu/ma, mou evpV auvto,n kri,sin toi/j e;qnesin evxoi,sei

Galatians 1:15 {Ote de. eeuvdo,khsen Îo` qeo.jÐ o` avfori,saj me evk koili,aj mhtro,j mou kai. kale,saj dia. th/j ca,ritoj auvtou/

While it is true that Sinaiticus reads prosede,xato instead of euvdo,khsen, the possibility that Paul was familiar with an Isaianic text that read euvdo,khsen cannot be quickly dismissed. First, the reading found in Codex Q is attested in the synoptics (Matt 3:17; 12:18; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Second, the verb hc'r' (“to please”) is more frequently rendered as euvdoke,w (21x) than prosde,comai (12x). Finally, Codex Q “hat . . . den ursprünglichen Text viel getreuer bewahrt.” 106 These considerations converge to establish at least the possibility that Paul was familiar with 103 In addition to many of the commentaries, see also Grelot, Poèmes, 53-54; Johannes Munck, Paul and the Salvation of Mankind (Richmond: John Knox Press, 1959), 24-35; Ciampa, Presence and Function, 111-29; Kim, Origin of Paul’s Gospel, 91-99; idem, Paul and the New Perspective, 101-103; Sandnes, Paul, 61-65. 104 This echo is proposed by Kim, Paul and the New Perspective, 102-103. 105 In addition to Codex Marchalianus (Q), this reading also appears in the SyroHexapla and Eusebius’ Isaiah commentary. 106 Ziegler, Isaias, 29.


77

a text of Isa 42:1 that read euvdo,khsen, and by extension the possibility that Paul echoes Isa 42:1 here in Gal 1:15. The substantival participle avfori,saj that functions as the subject of the verb euvdo,khsen may in fact be a conflation of Isa 41:8-9, Isa 42:1, and Jer 1:5.107

Gal 1:15 {Ote de. euvdo,khsen Îo` qeo.jÐ o` avfori,saj me evk koili,aj mhtro,j mou kai. kale,saj dia. th/j ca,ritoj auvtou/

Isa 41:8-9 (LXX) su. de, Israhl pai/j mou Iakwb o]n eevxelexa,mhn spe,rma Abraam o]n hvga,phsa 9 ouavntelabo,mhn avpV a;krwn th/j gh/j kai. evk tw/n skopiw/n auvth/j evka,lesa, se kai. ei=pa, soi pai/j mou ei= evxelexa,mhn se kai. ouvk evgkate,lipo,n se

Isa 42:1 (LXX[Q]) idou o` pai/j mou avntilh,myomai auvtou/ o` evklekto,j mmou o[n euvdo,khsen h` yuch, mou e;dwka to. pneu/ma, mou evpV auvto,n kri,sin toi/j e;qnesin evxoi,sei

Jer 1:5 (LXX) pro. tou/ me pla,sai se evn koili,a| evpi,stamai, se kai. pro. tou/ se evxelqei/n evk h`gi,aka, mh,traj sse profh,thn eivj e;qnh te,qeika, se

Although avfori,saj in Gal 1:15 is not a linguistic parallel to evxelexa,mhn in Isa 41:8-9, Traugott Holtz has argued that a material parallel exists.108 Seyoon Kim, building on the work of Holtz, contends that Paul may have combined Isa 41:8-9 and 42:1, since evkle,gomai / evklekto,j are part of the same word family and since both refer “to the same selection and call of the Servant of Yahweh.”109 He then suggests the possibility that Paul chose the verb avfori,zw here to also capture the concept of consecration expressed by the phrase h`gi,aka se found in Jer 1:5, a text widely acknowledged to be part of the intertextual matrix in Gal 1:15. A further reason for choosing avfori,zw rather than a form of evkle,gomai, according to Kim, is Paul’s desire to contrast his true state of being set apart as a 107 Here again, the suggestion is that of Kim, Paul and the New Perspective, 104-6. 108 Traugott Holtz, "Zum Selbstverständnis des Apostels Paulus," ThLZ 91 (1966): 32130, esp. 324-26. 109 Kim, Paul and the New Perspective, 105.

78


result of his encounter with Christ to his former life as a Pharisee. The result, according to Kim, is a combined allusion to Isa 41:8-9, Isa 42:1, and Jer 1:5. As much as we would like to agree with Kim, however, the number of steps necessary to reach his conclusion stretches credibility. While not denying the possibility of a material parallel between evkle,gomai / evklekto,j in Isa 41:8-9 and 42:1 and o` avfori,saj me in Gal 1:15, the question remains why Paul did not use a word more closely related to evkle,gomai / evklekto,j. Kim’s claim that it incorporates the notion of consecration from Jer 1:5 does not withstand close scrutiny. If avfori,zw shares so much of the semantic domains of evkle,gomai (Isa 41:8-9) and a`gia,zw (Jer 1:5), one would expect that rx;B' ( = evkle,gomai in Isa 41:8-9 LXX) or vd;Q' ( = a`gia,zw in Jer 1:5 LXX) would be rendered with a form of avfori,zw, but such is not the case. In this specific instance, Kim’s reconstruction is found lacking.110 We are on much firmer ground in seeing an allusion to Isa 49:1 in Gal 1:15 with regard to the phrase evk koili,aj mhtro,j mou and the use of the verb kale,w. Isaiah 49:1 (MT)

yl;êae ‘~yYIai W[Üm.vi qAx+r"me ~yMiÞaul. Wbyviîq.h;w> ynIa'êr"q. !j,B,ämi ‘hw"hy> `ymi(v. ryKiîz>hi yMiÞai y[eîM.mi

1

Isaiah 49:1 (LXX) avkou,sate, mou nh/soi kai. prose,cete e;qnh dia. cro,nou pollou/ sth,setai le,gei ku,rioj evk koili,aj mhtro,j mou evka,lesen to. o;noma, mou

Galatians 1:15 {Ote de. euvdo,khsen Îo` qeo.jÐ o` avfori,saj me evk koili,aj mhtro,j mou kai. kale,saj dia. th/j ca,ritoj auvtou

Isaiah 49:1-6 is widely regarded as the second servant song within Isa 40–55,111 though such a designation should not be understood to sever these verses from their context; the larger literary unit is 49:1-13.112 110 In passing it might be noted that avfori,zw occurs in Isa 52:11, where those who have been redeemed as a result of Yahweh bearing his holy arm (52:10) are told “set yourselves apart [avfori,sqhte], you who bear the vessels of the Lord.” While we are not arguing for an echo of Isa 52:11 in Gal 1:15, the fact that several other portions of Isa 52–53 are echoed in Gal 1–2 makes the possibility intriguing. 111 So originally Duhm, Jesaia, 172 and many after him; see, e.g., Grelot, Poemes, 39-43. 112 See, e.g., Melugin, Formation, 142-47; Childs, Isaiah, 381-82. For discussion of the type of oracle 49:1-6 is, see Melugin, Formation, 69-71; he concludes that Deutero-Isaiah “transformed the traditional language of commissioning reports for his own purposes” (71). For the view that Isa 49:1-26 is the larger macro-unit, see Korpel and de Moor, Structure, 444-46. But even within their understanding, they split off 49:1-6


79

Isaiah 49:1-6 can further be divided into two sections. Verses 1-4 recount the Servant’s call (49:1-3) and his concern at the propect of failure in his mission (49:4). Isa 49:5-6 provide Yahweh’s response, which consists of further description of the Servant (49:5) and the specifics of his commission (49:6). This commission has a dual focus in that it is oriented not only to Israel but to the nations as well. The most direct verbal link between Gal 1:15 and Isa 49:1 is the phrase evk koili,aj mhtro,j mou. Paul claims that God separated him from his mother’s womb, using the very same words found on the lips of the Servant in the LXX of Isa 49:1.113 While the phrase evk koili,aj is somewhat common in the LXX (23x), only five occurrences (Judg 16:17; Psa 21:11; 70:6; Job 1:21; Isa 49:1) include the words mhth,r and mou. Further confirming the link between the two texts is the use of the verb kale,w that closely follows the phrase evk koili,aj mhtro,j mou in both places, something that occurs nowhere else in the entire LXX. Whereas in Isa 49:1 kale,w refers to Yahweh naming the Servant, here in Gal 1:15 Paul uses the word in its theologically loaded sense of a divine summons to a specific task or position.114 Paul claims that this calling was “through his grace [dia. th/j ca,ritoj auvtou/],” an idea that although explicitly absent from Isa 49:1-6, is certainly consistent with it. Therefore the volume of vocabulary/syntax, combined with the thematic coherence between Isa 49:1 and Gal 1:15, strongly suggests that Paul is alluding to Isa 49:1. 115

and 49:7-13 into distinct sub-units. Others marking the division within 49:1-13 as occurring between verses 6 and 7 include Westermann, Isaiah 40–66, 206-17; Motyer, Prophecy, 383-92; Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40–55, 297-307. By contrast, Oswalt (Isaiah 40– 66, 285-300) sees the break between verses 7 and 8. 113 The Teacher of Righteousness may also be drawing upon Isa 49:1 when he refers to himself as chosen from the womb (~xrmw) and known from the belly of his mother (ymaÎ !jbmw) (1QHa 17:29-30). 114 See, e.g., L. Coenen, “Call,” NIDNT 1:275-76; J. Eckert, “kale,w,” EDNT 2:242-43. Of course, the notion of a divine summons to a specific task or position is at least implicitly present in Isa 49:1, and explicitly stated in Isa 49:6. Dunn (Galatians, 40) sees Isa 40–66 as an important background for the Pauline use of kale,w when he notes: “In everyday speech it denoted an invitation (to a meal) or summons (to court). But once again the weightier influence on Christian usage derives from the OT — particularly the striking language of Second Isaiah, where it becomes closely equivalent to ‘choose’ (and commission) (Isa. xli.8-9; xlii.6; xliii.1; xlv.3-4; xlviii.12; xlix.1; li.2). It is with this force that Paul uses the word” (40). A similar usage may also be in view in Gal 1:6, although there it refers to God summoning a person to himself through the proclamation of the gospel. 115 Our conclusion that Isa 49:1 is the primary text Paul alludes to here in Gal 1:15-16 does not exclude the possibility that other texts (e.g. Jer 1:5; Isa 42) are part of the intertextual landscape as well. However, both the quantity and quality of links in 1:1516 as well as other key points in Gal 1–2 distinguish Isa 49:1 as the primary text in view.

80


Further Isaianic influence may be seen as we move into Gal 1:16.116

Isa 49:3, 6 (LXX) kai. ei=pe,n moi dou/lo,j mou ei= su, Israhl kai. evn soi. doxasqh,somai 3

6 kai. ei=pe,n moi me,ga soi, evstin tou/ klhqh/nai, se pai/da, mou tou/ sth/sai ta.j fula.j Iakwb kai. th.n diaspora.n tou/ Israhl evpistre,yai ivdou. te,qeika, se eivj diaqh,khn ge,nouj eivj fw/j evqnw/n tou/ ei=nai, se eivj swthri,an e[wj evsca,tou th/j gh/j

Galatians 1:16 avpokalu,yai to.n uiò.n auvtou/ evn evmoi,( i[na euvaggeli,zwmai auvto.n evn toi/j e;qnesin( euvqe,wj ouv prosaneqe,mhn sarki. kai. ai[mati

Isa 52:5, 7, 10; 53:1 (LXX)

Galatians 1:16

kai. nu/n ti, w-de, evste ta,de le,gei ku,rioj o[ti evlh,mfqh o` lao,j mou dwrea,n qauma,zete kai. ovlolu,zete ta,de le,gei ku,rioj diV u`ma/j dia. panto.j to. o;noma, mou blasfhmei/tai evn toi/j e;qnesin

avpokalu,yai to.n uiò.n auvtou/ evn evmoi,( i[na euvaggeli,zwmai auvto.n evn toi/j e;qnesin( euvqe,wj ouv prosaneqe,mhn sarki. kai. ai[mati

w`j w[ra evpi. tw/n ovre,wn w`j po,dej euvaggelizome,nou avkoh.n eivrh,nhj w`j euvaggelizo,menoj avgaqa, o[ti avkousth.n poih,sw th.n swthri,an sou le,gwn Siwn basileu,sei sou o` qeo,j 7

kai. avpokalu,yei ku,rioj to.n braci,ona auvtou/ to.n a[gion evnw,pion pa,ntwn tw/n evqnw/n kai. o;yontai pa,nta ta. a;kra th/j gh/j th.n swthri,an th.n para. tou/ qeou/ 10

53:1 ku,rie ti,j evpi,steusen th/| avkoh/| h`mw/n kai. o` braci,wn kuri,ou ti,ni avpekalu,fqh

116 Due to space restraints we have not included the MT of the Isaianic texts in discussion here. The LXX of Isa 49:3 stays very close to the MT, while 49:6 varies slightly from the MT, most noticeably by inserting te,qeika, se eivj diaqh,khn ge,nouj (“I have placed you as a covenant for nation”). In Isa 52:5, the LXX follows the MT with the exception of inserting the phrase qauma,zete kai. ovlolu,zete ta,de (“wonder and wail at this”). Isaiah 52:7 reveals no differences between the LXX and the MT, whereas the only distinction between the LXX and the MT in 53:1 is the insertion of the vocative ku,rie. On the differences between the LXX and the MT in Isa 49:3, 6 and 53:1, see Ekblad, Servant Poems, 96-100, 107-13, 194-98.


81

We have already treated the original context of Isa 49:1-6, so all that is necessary here is to briefly comment on the original context of Isa 52:112.117 The passage breaks down into four components.118 In verses 1-3, Zion is ordered to awaken in light of their impending gracious salvation, expressed in terms of being dressed in beautiful garments and having their chains removed.119 Yahweh’s words of resolve are then found in verses 4-6. Israel’s captors blaspheme Yahweh’s name (52:5), but there will come a day when God’s people will know Yahweh’s name (52:6). The third section may be found in verses 7-10, where Isaiah uses hymnic language 120 to announce the good news (rFEïb;m. / euvaggelizome,nou) of the reign of Yahweh over Zion as her God. This reign is the product of Yahweh bearing his arm in the sight of all the nations, resulting in Jerusalem being comforted. 121 The passage concludes in 117 Scholars are notably split on the unity and structure of Isa 52:1-12. Within the larger structure of Isa 40–55 several scholars regard the larger unit as 51:9–52:12; see, e.g., Melugin, Formation, 164-66; Oswalt, Isaiah 40–66, 339-41; Korpel and de Moor, Structure, 542-44. Others see the macro-unit running from 51:1–52:12; see, e.g., Motyer, Prophecy, 402; Childs, Isaiah, 396-401. With respect to Isa 52:1-12 itself, the unity of the pericope is advocated by (among others) Oswalt, Isaiah 40–66, 339-41; Korpel and de Moor, Structure, 542-44. 118 Cf. also Korpel and de Moor, Structure, 542-44. 119 Some scholars prefer instead to see the break occurring between verses 2 and 3 on the basis that as divine speech verse 3 more naturally goes with what follows; see, e.g., Melugin, Formation, 165; Koole, Isaiah III, 2:211-14. But in our estimation the repetition of the similar formula at the beginning of verses 3 (hw"h ë y> rm:aå ' ‘hko-yKi( / o[ti ta,de le,gei ku,rioj) and 4 (hwIëhy> yn"ådoa] ‘rm;a' hkoÜ yKiä / ou[twj le,gei ku,rioj) , along with the shift in address from second to third person suggest the break is more naturally seen between verses 3 and 4. Additionally, in the textual tradition most of the evidence favors a break between verses 3 and 4; see Korpel and de Moor, Structure, 540-41. 120 By using the phrase “hymnic language” we are not making any claim as to the separate existence of this section before Isaiah was written, as suggested by J. Begrich, Studien zu Deuterojesaja (TB 20; München: Chr. Kaiser Verlag, 1963), 86; see further discussion in Dirk H. Odendaal, The Eschatological Expectation of Isaiah 40-66 with Special Reference to Israel and the Nations (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1970), 89-95. These same scholars (among others) have also noted similarities between the language here and the enthronement psalms. One scholar goes so far as to regard Isa 52:7 as the key to Isa 40–66 when he remarks “Und mit eben dieser Heilsverkündigung beginnt jetzt eine ganz neue Epoche: die Endgeschichte Israels unter der unteraufhebbaren und ewig gültigen Königsherrschaft Jahwes, die in der Königzeit Jerusalems als verborgene Wirklichkeit hinter dem Regimente der Dynastie Davids stand”; see H. J. Kraus, Die Königsherrschaft Gottes im Alten Testament (BHT 13; Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1951), 106. Cf. the similar conclusion of Odendaal (Eschatological, 92) — “Thus 52:7 gives us a key to the understanding of the whole message of chs. 40–66.”; see also Mettinger, “Search,” 143-54. 121 Scholars have long noted the connections between Isa 52:7-10 and Isa 40:9-11, which may be briefly summarizes as follows: (1) the use of “gospel” language ( rfb / euvaggeli,zw) connected to the announcement of Yahweh’s reign over Zion; (2) the announcement coming on a mountain; (3) salvation accomplished by Yahweh’s arm. For further discussion, see Reinhard Gregor Kratz, "Der Anfang des Zweiten Jesaja

82


verses 11-12 with a call for purity among God’s people in response to their salvation as they participate in a new exodus led by Yahweh himself. Returning to Gal 1:16, the infinitive avpokalu,yai that begins the verse finally completes the main thought introduced by the verb euvdo,khsen in 1:15. Paul claims that God delighted “to reveal his son in me [avpokalu,yai to.n uiòn. auvtou/ evn evmoi,].” The use of the preposition evn after the verb avpokalu,ptw is a rare construction; there are only eight comparable examples in the LXX and NT combined. A survey of these eight occurrences reveals three uses: (1) the evn phrase indicates the time when something is revealed (Num 24:4, 16; Dan 2:19; 1 Pet 1:5); (2) the evn phrase refers to the sphere/location of a revelation (Judg 5:2; 1 Sam 2:27; Pro 11:13); or (3) the evn phrase points out the actions or being by which something is revealed (Ezek 16:36; 22:10). It should be noted that in none of these places does evn function to indicate the person to whom a revelation is given.122 Based on this data, it seems best to understand the phrase evn evmoi, as indicating the sphere in which God’s Son would be revealed; hence, Paul presents God’s intention as revealing his Son in the sphere of the apostle Paul’s life and ministry, a conclusion that will be confirmed below in our discussions of 1:24 and 2:20.123 Recently, Carey Newman has argued that the phrase avpokalu,yai … evn evmoi, in Gal 1:16 is in fact an echo of the phrase evn soi. doxasqh,somai

in Jes 40,1f. und seine literarischen Horizonte," ZAW 105 (1993): 400-19. Even more significant are the connections that Laato (Servant of YHWH, 110) makes between Isa 49:1-13 and 52:7-10. “First, great emphasis is laid upon how the exodus from Babylon is now close to fruition (cf. 40:3-5; 49:10-13). Second, the motif of YHWH’s consolation is expressed in 52:9ba with the aid of a phrase also found in 49:13: Kî| niHam YHWH àmmo (see further 40:1-2). Third, Isa 52:10 connects this new exodus to the ultimate salvation of the world — a statement which corresponds well to 49:6 and its thematic parallel, 40:3-5. Fourth, Israel, which returns to Zion (together with YHWH), is described in 52:7-10 as the ideal group which will restore Zion to its glory as becomes obvious from the antecedent context (cf. Isa 51:1–52:6).” Such connections within Isaiah itself further raise the possibility that Paul noticed them as well and may be drawing on this group of texts that share such thematic parallels. Cf. also Mettinger, “Search,” 151-52. 122 This calls into serious question the conclusion in BDF §220.1 that evn “stands for the customary dat. proper” here in Gal 1:16; cp. Turner, Syntax, 41; BDAG. When it is necessary to specify the “indirect object” of avpokalu,ptw, either the simple dative (Isa 53:1) or the preposition pro,j (Jer 11:20) is used. 123 Cf. the similar conclusion of Beverly R. Gaventa, "Galatians 1 and 2: Autobiography as a Paradigm," NovT 28 (1986): 309-26; Heikki Räisänen, Paul and the Law (WUNT 29; Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1983), 60-64; R. Longenecker, Galatians, 32. The change in pronoun (evmoi, in Gal 1:16; soi, in Isa 49:3) is due to the change in speaker; in Isa 49:3 Yahweh is speaking to the Servant, whereas in Gal 1:16 Paul (the Servant) is speaking of himself.


83

found in Isa 49:3.124 Newman argues that doxa,zw is often used to denote the manifestation of God’s visible presence in the prophets, with elements of eschatological judgment frequently present.125 Newman argues that in such cases “avpokalu,ptw and doxa,zw, when speaking of God’s eschatological self-manifestation, bear the same semantic cargo.”126 Such language grows out of the early Jewish apocalyptic tradition of throne visions, which in turn stem from Ezekiel 1. As a result, Newman concludes that Paul “heuristically read his Christophany against the grid of mystical and apocalyptic Judaism, specifically the heavenly ascents of Jewish apocalypses, and therefore interpreted the Christophany as a throne vision in which the special agent of God was equated with the Glory of God.”127 Although we remain skeptical that Paul was as indebted to Jewish mysticism as Newman claims, 128 the parallels between the passives of doxa,zw and avpokalu,ptw adduced by Newman are significant enough to suggest the presence of at least a thematic parallel between Isa 49:3 and Gal 1:16, and given the allusion to Isa 49:1 in Gal 1:15 an echo of Isa 49:3 here in Gal 1:16 cannot be ruled out. 129

124 Carey C. Newman, Paul's Glory-Christology: Tradition and Rhetoric (NovTSup 69; Leiden: Brill, 1992), 205-207. 125 See, e.g., Isa 24:21-23; Eze 28:22; 39:13; Hag 1:8; cp. Paul’s use in 2 Thess 1:10. 126 Newman, Paul’s Glory-Christology, 206. 127 Ibid., 207. 128 Newman’s discussion of Gal 1:11-17 depends in part on a comparison with 1 Cor 12. Although he argues that the two accounts are not relating the same event, Newman claims that they “both reflect the same kind of ecstatic experience — at least in Paul’s interpretation” (202). This conclusion, however, is debatable; see William Baird, "Visions, Revelation, and Ministry: Reflections on 2 Cor 12:1-5 and Gal 1:11-17," JBL 104 (1985): 651-62. 129 Allusions to Isa 49:3 in the Second Temple period are noticeably lacking, though Pss. Sol. 17:21 should not be overlooked. In 17:1-10 the author expresses trust in the Lord as their king, and the Davidic line as his chosen vehicle of ruling over Israel. Yet because of Israel’s sin a “lawless one” was permitted to destroy Jerusalem and send the people into exile (17:11-20). At this point, the psalmist prays that the Lord would raise up a king from the line of David “to rule over your servant Israel” (17:21), language likely taken from Isa 49:3. What follows in 17:22-43 is a series of descriptions of the Davidic king who is eventually referred to as “the Lord Messiah” (17:32). Notably, several lines within this section echo language from Isa 49:1-6. Destroying the lawless nations with the word of his mouth (17:24) recalls the Servant’s description in 49:2 of his mouth being fashioned into a sharp sword. He “will gather [suna,xei] a holy people” (17:26) is reminiscent of the Servant’s mission “to gather Jacob [tou/ sunagagei/n to.n Iakwb]” (49:5). In 17:30, the psalmist speaks of the king glorifying the Lord “in a place of prominence over all the earth,” which may be an echo of the statement in Isa 49:3 that the Lord “will be glorified in” the Servant. The volume of contact points between Pss. Sol. 17 and Isa 49:1-6 makes it clear that Isa 49 has informed the author’s presentation of Israel’s salvation, which is tied to a Davidic king. But it must be noted that the Servant is not the Davidic king, but the nation of Israel. For discussion, see Atkinson, Psalms of Solomon, 329-78.

84


A second possibility is that the use of the verb avpokalu,ptw is an echo of Isa 52:10 and/or Isa 53:1. In those two texts, it is Yahweh who reveals his arm in the presence of all the nations, so that the ends of the earth may see his salvation (52:10). This revelation of Yahweh’s arm is then linked to the activity of the Servant in 53:1, tying together the threads of salvation, Yahweh’s arm, and the Servant. We have already observed that Paul describes the death of Jesus in terms of the Servant from Isa 53 in Gal 1:4, the purpose of which was that “Christ might rescue us from this present evil age.” Admittedly the volume of shared vocabulary is slim, though the thematic coherence between the Isaianic and Galatian contexts, combined with the recurrence of other Isaianic allusions and echoes suggest caution in too quickly dismissing a possible echo. The possibility of an echo of Isa 52:10/53:1 is further strengthened by the purpose statement found in Gal 1:16; the revelation of God’s Son in him was so that he “might preach the good news about him among the Gentiles [i[na euvaggeli,zwmai auvto.n evn toi/j e;qnesin].” We have already discussed the Isaianic roots of euvaggeli,zw / euvagge,lion, as well as noted the particular significance of Isa 52:7.130 Paul’s proclamation of the gospel is to take place evn toi/j e;qnesin, a phrase that many connect to either Isa 42:6 or 49:6, 8.131 While not denying such a possibility, one should not rule out an echo of Isa 52:5, where the exact phrase evn toi/j e;qnesin is found in close proximity to the verb euvaggeli,zw in 52:7.132 There, however, Yahweh complains that “because of you all the time my name is blasphemed among the Gentiles [evn toi/j e;qnesin].” Thus Paul has taken In the rabbinic materials, Isa 49:3 is frequently cited, though almost always in reference to the nation of Israel (see, e.g., Gen. Rab. 28:12; Lev. Rab. 1:2; Rab. Num. 23:7; b. Sanh. 44a). Isaiah 49:3 is also applied to the individual who studies Torah in b. Yoma 86a, but this is a far cry from Paul’s application of Isa 49:3 to himself here in Gal 1:16. 130 See the discussion above, 67-70. 131 In both Isa 42:6 and 49:6, the phrase is eivj diaqh,khn ge,nouj eivj fw/j evqnw/n, while in 49:8 the phrase is abbreviated to eivj diaqh,khn evqnw/n. The difference between eivj and evn is not significant enough to eliminate at least a thematic link; indeed, by this time period eivj and evn were sometimes interchangeable (cf. BDF §218). Furthermore, Paul may have wished to avoid the potentially problematic word diaqh,kh, given that he intended to use it in his discussion of Abraham and the Law (3:15, 17; 4:24). 132 In passing it should be noted that Paul does quote Isa 52:5 in Rom 2:24. In its original context, Isa 52:5 is Yahweh’s statement that his name being blasphemed while Israel is subject to her captors. In the verse that follows (52:6) God resolves to cause his people to know his name, which suggests that the words and actions of Israel during captivity are at least part of the reason Yahweh’s name is being blasphemed (so also Koole, Isaiah III, 2:226). The fact that the LXX inserts the phrase diV u`ma/j (“because of you”) as well as evn toi/j e;qnesin (“among the Gentiles”) in the last clause of Isa 52:5 at least confirms that the translator understood the passage in this manner. In Rom 2:24 Paul argues that the sinfulness of the Jews of his own day was resulting in a similar dishonoring of God’s name among the Gentiles.


85

a phrase that modified the disparagement of God’s name and instead applies it to the scope of his proclamation of the gospel (cf. 52:7). 133 Perhaps Paul regarded his proclamation of the good news “among the nations” as the solution to Yahweh’s name being blasphemed “among the nations.”134 Our comparison of Gal 1:16 with the selected portions of Isa 49, 52, 53 brings us to the conclusion that at the least thematic parallels exist between Gal 1:16 and Isa 49:3, 6; 52:5, 7, 10; 53:1. The parallels between Isa 49:3/52:10/53:1 may further suggest the presence of a combined echo of these three texts in Gal 1:16. The prominence of the idea of ministry among the Gentiles, found in Isa 42:6; 49:6, 8; 52:5 and mentioned by Paul Gal 1:16 (as well as later, see below), makes identification of a particular text difficult, so it probably best to see these references as a thematic parallel. The demonstrable presence of Isa 49:1-6, as well as portions of Isa 52 and 53, leads to the conclusion that Paul has likely woven these passages together in his effort to relate his encounter with Christ and the resulting commission as apostle to the Gentiles. The fact that we cannot always pinpoint with precision where the various elements 133 We may also note that Ciampa (Presence and Function, 117-18) sees an additional parallel in Isa 66:19, where God’s people will proclaim his glory “among the nations [evn toi/j e;qnesin].” 134 Within Second Temple Judaism there was a wide diversity of opinion on the fate of the Gentiles within God’s ultimate plan for human history. The best recent survey of the literature can now be found in Eckhard J. Schnabel, Jesus and the Twelve (vol. 1 of Early Christian Mission; Downers Grove: IVP, 2004), 92-172. He describes the attitudes found in Palestinian-Judaism as running from exclusivity to universal expectation. Texts such as 1 Macc 13:47-48; 14:36; 2 Macc 10:17 regard expulsion of the pagans from Palestinian cities by force as necessary responses to specific situations and not necessarily a general approach. More positive statements regarding the Gentiles include several different approaches: (1) inclusion on the basis of circumcision (e.g., Jub. 15:24); (2) pilgrimage to Mt. Zion in the last days (e.g., T. Naph. 8:3-4; 1 QM XII, 13; XIX, 6); (3) participation in salvation in eschaton (e.g, Tob 14:6-7; 1 En. 10:20-21; 90:30; T. Benj. 9:2); (4) full and equal inclusion in the eschaton (1 En. 90:33-38; maybe T. Jud. 24:5-6; 25:3-5; T. Benj. 9:2; 10:9-11). With respect to Diaspora Judaism, Schnabel notes that even though the general tenor is more open than that of Palestinian Judaism, this openness did not result in the removal of cultural and ritual markers that distinguished Jews from Gentiles. “Conversion and adoption of the Jewish faith as a proselyte resulted even in the Diaspora in a fundamental ‘rehabilitation,’ the entry into a new society” (170). Schnabel also notes the relative absence of references to the blessing of Abraham in Gen 12:1-3 in the Second Temple literature. Such an absence makes Paul’s sustained argumentation in Gal 3–4 from that very text all the more intriguing. Schnabel’s helpful survey provides a useful contrast to Paul’s firm conviction of his calling to be an apostle to the Gentiles, offering them inclusion in the people of God on the same basis as Jews — faith in Jesus. Paul was convinced that the messianic age had arrived in the death/resurrection/ascension of Christ, and consequently the Gentiles were now being invited to participate in Yahweh’s redemption.

86


originate should not militate against their presence, especially when there is significant correspondence not only verbally, but also thematically. Furthermore, the clustering of these ideas in Isa 49–53 provides additional evidence that these chapters have profoundly shaped his self-understanding as apostle to the Gentiles. Scholars have long puzzled over Paul’s decision to head to Arabia following his encounter with Christ (Gal 1:17). Where exactly did Paul go when he departed “into Arabia [eivj VArabi,an]?” Why did he go there and what did Paul do while there? These questions are interrelated, and scholarly consensus remains elusive. On the one hand, a number of scholars argue that Paul was seeking solitude to reflect upon his lifechanging encounter with the risen Christ, perhaps following in the tradition of Elijah.135 More common is the suggestion that Paul went to Arabia to begin carrying out his commission as apostle to the Gentiles, a view which is usually accompanied by the conclusion that Paul preached Christ among the Nabateans.136 But why Arabia? For the most part scholars plead ignorance based on the lack of data, though Martin Hengel and Anna Schwemer have recently proposed both practical (e.g., no apostle had preached the gospel there) and theological reasons (e.g., prophetic promises in Isa 60:6-7).137 The most specific proposal has come from Seyoon Kim, who claims that Paul’s choice of Arabia was based on his reading of Isa 42:11.138 His argument runs as follows:

135 Among commentators, see Burton (Galatians, 55-58), Rohde (Galater, 62-63) and Longenecker (Galatians, 34-35); see also Rainer Riesner, Paul's Early Period: Chronology, Mission Strategy, Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 258-60; and, most substantively, N. T. Wright, "Paul, Arabia, and Elijah (Galatians 1:17)," JBL 115 (1996): 683-92. Wright argues that Paul regarded himself as zealous for Yahweh in the tradition of Phinehas (Num 25:7-13) and, more importantly, Elijah (1 Kgs 19:14). After Elijah’s confrontation with Ahab and Jezebel, he fled to Mt. Horeb “to resign his prophetic commission” (685). Just as Paul followed Elijah’s example in his preconversion zeal, according to Wright, so too Paul followed Elijah by going to Mt. Sinai (= Arabia; cf. Gal 4:25), and then returning to Damascus (cp. 1 Kgs 19:15 with Gal 1:17). When combined with the fact that Paul describes his call in prophetic terms, Wright concludes that Paul’s purpose in going to Arabia must have been for communion with God, whether to attempt to resign his prophetic commission or at least complain of his inadequacy. 136 Among commentators, see Bruce (Galatians, 96) and Légasse (Galates, 100-2); see also Wayne A. Meeks, The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983), 10; Jerome Murphy-O'Connor, "Paul in Arabia," CBQ 55 (1993): 732-37; Martin Hengel and Anna M. Schwemer, Paul Between Damascus and Antioch: The Unknown Years (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1997), 10620. 137 See Hengel and Schwemer, Paul, 106-20. 138 Kim, Paul and the New Perspective, 103-104.


87

[In] Isa 42:11 … the Ebed [is] called to be a bearer of light and salvation to the gentiles [which] leads the inhabitants of Kedar and Sela to sing praises to the Lord. rd"qe refers to a North-Arabic tribe, and in Isa 60:17 it is identified with Nebaioth, the oldest son of Ishmael, from whom, according to Josephus (Ant. 1.220-221), the Nabateans took their name. [l;s, (“Rock”) was the old name of Petra of the Hellenistic-Roman period. In fact, LXX renders [l;s, Pe,tra in Isa 42:11. So, for Paul both rd"qe and [l;s, would have referred to Arabia, the Nabatean Kingdom, whose leading city was Petra during his time. This conjecture is supported by the Targum, which has simply “the wilderness of Arabia” for both. Thus, Paul’s first missionary attempt in “Arabia” immediately after his apostolic commission (Gal 1:15-17) seems to indicate that he indeed interpreted his call to an apostleship to the gentiles on the Damascus road in the light of Isa 42.139

Kim’s case is at least plausible, and warrants serious consideration. The link between Kedar and the Nabateans through the lineage of Ishmael is well-attested not only within Scripture, but from Josephus as well. Kim’s observation that the LXX renders [l;s, as Pe,tra in Isa 42:11 is significant, as is the supporting evidence from the Targumic rendering “wilderness of Arabia [yaeb'r[; rb;dm;].” Further support comes from Paul’s indications that his missionary itinerary was influenced by passages such as Genesis 10 and Isa 66:18-21.140 When this evidence is considered along with other possible echoes of Isa 42 here in Gal 1, Kim has presented a reasonable explanation for why Paul set out for Arabia,141 though a case that should be at best considered a thematic parallel. After speaking of his time in Syria and Cilicia in Gal 1:21, Paul claims in 1:22-23 that he was still unknown to the churches in Judea; they were, however, quite aware of his radical conversion from perse139 Ibid., 103-104. 140 See the helpful discussions in Riesner, Paul’s Early Period, 241-256; Roger D. Aus, "Paul's Travel Plans to Spain and the 'Full Number of the Gentiles' of Rom. XI 25," NovT 21 (1979): 232-62; and James M. Scott, Paul and the Nations: The Old Testament and Jewish Background of Paul's Mission to the Nations with Special Reference to the Destination of Galatians (WUNT 84; Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1995), 140 n. 23, 150 n. 76. 141 If in fact Paul went to Arabia because he interpreted his apostolic commission to the Gentiles in light of Isa 42, Kim is certainly right to conclude that the purpose of such a trip was evangelistic (Paul and the New Perspective, 104). However, a potential weakness in Kim’s argument is his failure to consider Paul’s use of Arabia in Gal 4:25 in his “allegorical” reading of Abraham’s two sons. Is there any connection between Gal 1:17 and 4:25, and if so how might Kim’s conclusion regarding the former impact his reading of the latter? Furthermore, Kim fails to consider the possibility that Paul went to Arabia without explicitly basing his decision on Isa 42, and that only in looking back later does Paul see that even his decision to go to Arabia was the divinely guided fulfillment of Isa 42, though he was unaware of it at the time it happened.

88


cutor to proclaimer of the gospel. The result, according to Paul, was that “they were glorifying God in me [evdo,xazon evn evmoi. to.n qeo,n]” (1:24).142 This seemingly awkward clause is in fact an echo of Isa 49:3.143 Isaiah 49:3 (MT)

3

hT'a'_-yDIb.[; yliÞ rm,aYOðw: `ra")P't.a, ^ßB-. rv,a] lae§r"f.yI

Isa 49:3 (LXX) evn soi. doxasqh,somai

Gal 1:24 evdo,xazon evn evmoi. to.n qeo,n

Both verses share a form of the verb doxa,zw followed by the preposition evn + a personal pronoun, a construction paralleled in the LXX only in Judg (A) 9:9 and Isa 49:3.144 Given that Isa 49 is alluded to in 1:15-16, as well as possibly echoed in 1:10, the possibility of an additional echo here is significantly increased. The presence of an echo here may also account for the unusual nature of the phrase, and signal to the reader a connection with the phrase avpokalu,yai to.n uiò.n auvtou/ evn evmoi, in 1:16. The shared vocabulary/syntax and thematic coherence, combined with the presence of an allusion to Isa 49:1 in Gal 1:15 and an echo of Isa 49:3 in Gal 1:16, provide sufficient evidence for regarding Gal 1:24 as an additional echo of Isa 49:3. By means of this echo, Paul is subtly indicating that God’s purpose of revealing his Son “in” him was already finding its fulfillment to such an extent that the churches in Judea were 142 Some standard reference works translate evn evmoi, as “because of me”; cf. H. E. Dana and Julius R. Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament (New York: Macmillan, 1957), 105; BDAG. While this is possible, the following considerations argue in favor of translating the phrase as “in me”: (1) since Paul speaks of God revealing his son “in me” (Gal 1:15-16) it is at least possible that he intends the thought of glorifying God in a parallel fashion “in me”; (2) there are several other ways to communicate the idea “because of me” (e.g. dia, + accusative, avpo, + genitive, evk + genitive, evpi, + genitive or dative) that are much more common and direct; (3) the parallels in John 13:31-32 and 17:10 clearly have this meaning. Although recognizing the echo of Isa 49:3, R. Longenecker (Galatians, 42) prefers “because of me” and renders the the phrase evn soi. doxasqh,somai from Isa 49:3 as “because of you I will be glorified.” Ciampa (Presence and Function, 124-25), however, notes that the Hebrew verb translated by doxa,zw in Isa 49:3 (rap) lends itself better to the sense of God being glorified “in” the Servant. For a defense of the rendering “because of me,” see esp. Ernest D. W. Burton, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians (ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1956), 65. 143 This allusion/echo is also noted by Lindars, New Testament Apologetic, 223; Kim, Paul and the New Perspective, 101; Ciampa, Presence and Function, 124-25; Wilk, Bedeutung des Jesajabuches, 378; see also the commentaries of R. Longenecker (Galatians, 42), Bruce (Galatians, 105), Schlier (Galaterbrief, 63), and Légasse (Galates, 115). 144 The use of doxa,zw with the preposition evn + a personal pronoun occurs elsewhere in the NT only in John 13:31, 32.


89

glorifying God “in” him.145 Even though Paul has moved forward from a description of the Christophany to his subsequent activities, it appears that Isa 49 continues to shape even his presentation of the years that followed.

2.2.4 Galatians 2:1-10 The opening words of Gal 2:1 move Paul’s account forward fourteen years to a scene in Jerusalem.146 Paul, Barnabas, and Titus go to Jerusalem “in accordance with a revelation [kata. avpoka,luyin]” to present his gospel to the pillars in Jerusalem (2:2). While there some “false brethren” attempted to compel Titus to be circumcised, but Paul and his companions stood firm in their opposition. Instead, the pillars recognized Paul’s commission to the Gentiles, adding nothing to his gospel. Two elements of Paul’s account in these verses reveal echoes of Isa 49 that have reverberated from chapter 1: Paul’s concern that he may have run in vain, and his ministry among the Gentiles. Paul explains the reason for setting out his gospel before “those of reputation [toi/j dokou/sin]” while in Jerusalem (2:1-10) with two phrases. The first is kata. avpoka,luyin (“according to revelation”), which Paul does not elaborate on further.147 The second phrase expresses his concern: “lest I was running, or had run, in vain [mh, pwj eivj keno.n tre,cw h' e;dramon]” (2:2). This expression of concern is expressed in terms that echo Isa 49:4.148

145 One might also note similar language found in John’s gospel, where Jesus speaks of God glorifying himself “in him” (13:31-32) as well “in them [i.e., Jesus’ followers]” (17:10). 146 Whether or not Paul is counting from his conversion (1:15) or his first visit to Jerusalem (1:18-20) is difficult to determine with certainty; for a helpful discussion of the complex issues surrounding the chronology here, see R. Longenecker, Galatians, lxxii-lxxxviii, and the bibliography cited there. Though I am inclined to agree with Longenecker that the fourteen years is counted from Paul’s conversion, none of the arguments presented here depend on this tentative conclusion. 147 The reason for expressing it this way is likely to emphasize Paul’s dependence on divine direction in ministry rather than dependence upon human authorities; cf. Dunn, Galatians, 91. 148 Among commentators, Bruce (Galatians, 110-11) is one of the few to note the possibility of an echo; see also Kim, Paul and the New Perspective, 101; Sandnes, Paul — One of the Prophets?, 61-62; Ciampa, Presence and Function, 131-32; Lindars, New Testament Apologetic, 223-24.

90


Isaiah 49:4 (MT)

4

qyrIål. ‘yTir>m;’a' ynIÜa]w: yxiäKo lb,h,Þw> Whtoïl. yTi[.g:ëy" yjiäP'v.mi ‘!kea' ytiyLe_ki ytiÞL'[up.W hw"ëhy>-ta, `yh'(l{a/-ta,

Isaiah 49:4 (LXX) kai. evgw. ei=pa kenw/j evkopi,asa kai. eivj ma,taion kai. eivj ouvde.n e;dwka th.n ivscu,n mou dia. tou/to h` kri,sij mou para. kuri,w| kai. o` po,noj mou evnanti,on tou/ qeou/ mou

Galatians 2:2 avne,bhn de. kata. avpoka,luyin\ kai. avneqe,mhn auvtoi/j to. euvagge,lion o] khru,ssw evn toi/j e;qnesin( katV ivdi,an de. toi/j dokou/sin( mh, pwj eivj keno.n tre,cw h' e;dramon

In Isa 49:4, the Servant expresses concern that he may labor in vain, a concern that follows immediately on the heels of Yahweh saying to him “in you I will be glorified [ra")P't.a, ^ßB. / evn soi. doxasqh,somai]” (49:3). A similar pattern is observable in Galatians. In 1:24 Paul states that the Judean churches “were glorifying God in me,” which we have noted is an echo of Isa 49:3. Now in Gal 2:2, Paul worries, like the Servant of Isa 49, that his labor may end in vain.149 When one further considers the importance that Isa 49 played in Paul’s account of his apostolic call in Gal 1:15-17, the verbal, sequential, and conceptual parallels make an echo of Isa 49:4 extremely likely.150 Further confirmation comes from Paul’s other uses of the prepositional phrase eivj keno,n (2 Cor 6:1; Phil 2:16 [2x]; 1 Thess 3:5), all of which are located in contexts where Paul expresses concern that his apostolic ministry to the Gentiles might be in vain. In 2 Cor 6:1 this expression of concern is immediately followed by a citation of Isa 49:8, while Phil 2:16 contains an even clearer allusion to Isa 49:4 by using the same verb (kopia,w) along with the phrase eivj keno,n.151 Once again we are confronted with evidence that Paul understood his apostolic call in light of Isa 49. Three times in 2:1-10 Paul explicitly refers to his ministry to the Gentiles; he uses the phrase eivj ta. e;qnh twice (2:8, 9) and evn toi/j e;qnesin

149 Although one is an adverbial prepositional phrase and the other an adverb, the difference is not significant, especially when one considers that other than Isa 49:3 LXX the adverb appears only in James 4:5. By contrast, the prepositional phrase eivj keno,n appears 13x in the LXX, and 5x in the NT (2 Cor 6:1; Gal 2:2; Phil 2:16 [2x]; 1 Thess 3:5). 150 Although we have found no allusions or echoes of Isa 49:4 in the Second Temple period, the fact that R. Abbahu uttered Isa 49:4 on his death bed left a noticeable mark on the rabbinic materials (see, e.g., Gen. Rab. 35:8; Exod. Rab. 39:3; TanH Yel. 1.1; 12.4). 151 Even the occurrence in 1 Thess 3:5 may be an echo of Isa 49:4, though instead of the verb kopia,w Paul uses the related noun ko,poj.


91

once (2:2).152 We have already seen evn toi/j e;qnesin in 1:16, where Paul expressed the purpose of God revealing his Son to him as “preaching the good news about him among the Gentiles.” In our discussion there, we concluded that Paul’s use of the phrase may have been drawn from Isa 42:6, 49:6-8, and/or 52:5-7.153 The fact that Paul can use evn toi/j e;qnesin and eivj ta. e;qnh seemingly interchangeably within 2:1-10 further confirms our conclusion that there is no significant difference between the two phrases.154 So just as we discovered in Gal 1:16, the phrases evn toi/j e;qnesin (2:2) and eivj ta. e;qnh (2:8, 9) are thematic parallels to the concept of good news going to the nations in Isa 40-66.

2.2.5 Galatians 2:11-21 Unlike the previous events recounted in 1:15-2:9, Paul does not indicate how long after this meeting in Jerusalem (2:1-10) the incident in Antioch (2:11-21) took place. Paul describes table fellowship taking place between Jews and Gentiles in Antioch, in which Cephas fully participated. Once “certain people from James [tinaj avpo. VIakw,bou]” came to town, however, Cephas withdrew from such close contact with Gentiles out of fear. Other Jews soon followed his lead, including even Barnabas. Fearing his vision of Jews and Gentiles united in one body slipping away, Paul rebuked Cephas in the presence of the community. The content of this rebuke begins in 2:14, and likely continues to the end of the chapter.155 Paul’s argument in 2:15-21 is by all accounts complex, filled with densely loaded language.156 All that can be done here is sketch out our 152 For discussion of the Second Temple literature on the subject of Gentile inclusion within the people of God, see above, 85 n. 134. 153 See discussion above 80-82. 154 The most that one might be able to claim is that evn toi/j e;qnesin emphasizes the sphere of Paul’s ministry, whereas eivj ta. e;qnh focuses on the goal or destination, but even this distinction is likely dubious at best. 155 It is admittedly difficult to determine where the quotation beginning in 2:14 ends; some restrict it to 2:14 only, while others see it continuing through 2:21. None of my conclusions depend on deciding this issue. 156 Scholars who analyze Galatians through rhetorical lenses consistently regard Gal 2:15-21 as the propositio of Paul’s argument; see, e.g., Betz, Galatians, 18-19, 113-114; R. Longenecker, Galatians, cix-cxix, 80-83; C. J. K. Korang, "Paul's Christocentric Soteriology: A Study of Paul's Theological Propositio," Hekima Review 19 (1998): 58-68; Ben Witherington, Grace in Galatia: A Commentary on St. Paul's Letter to the Galatians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 34-36, 169-72. For attempts to trace the argument apart from rhetorical categories, see, e.g., Jan Lambrecht, "The Line of Thought in Gal. 2.14b-21," NTS 24 (1978): 484-95; Colin G. Kruse, Paul, the Law, and Justification (Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson, 1997), 65-72; Stephen A. Cummins, Paul and the Cruci-

92


understanding of it in the briefest of terms. In vv. 15-16, Paul lays out his basic thesis: no one (whether Jew or Gentile) is justified on the basis of Torah-observance,157 but rather on the basis of faith in Jesus Christ. He then responds to the charge that justification is incomplete without Torah-observance (17-20). To this Paul answers that if this were so, Christ would actually be an active promoter of sin, since he has torn down the distinction between Jew and Gentile rooted in the Torah (17-18). He further adds that because he has died with Christ and Christ now lives in him, he is liberated from the Torah as a means of relating to God (1920). The ultimate grounds of his argument is then given in 2:21 — returning to Torah would actually nullify God’s grace revealed in the cross, since Christ’s death demonstrates that righteousness (or justification) cannot come through Torah. Three elements in Paul’s argument here are dependent on Isaiah 40–66: the background of dik- language in 2:16-21, Paul’s claim that Christ lives in him (2:20), and his assertion that Christ gave himself for Paul (2:20). Paul uses the verb dikaio,w four times in Gal 2:16-17, as well as the noun dikaiosu,nh in 2:21. These key terms reappear frequently in the remainder of Galatians and lie at the heart of the epistle’s argument.158 How one understands Paul’s use of dik- language fundamentally shapes how one understands Galatians, and yet few elements of Paul’s theology have been more debated, with the conversation showing no signs of abating.159 Engaging such a complex and far-ranging discussion is well fied Christ in Antioch: Maccabean Martyrdom and Galatians 1 and 2 (SNTSMS 114; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), 189-230; Moisés Silva, "Faith Versus Works of Law in Galatians," in Justification and Variegated Nomism 2: The Paradoxes of Paul (ed. D. A. Carson, Peter T. O'Brien, and Mark A. Seifrid; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2004), 217-48. 157 “Torah-observance” is our way of rendering the controversial phrase “works of the Law [e;rgwn no,mou]” in 2:16. For discussion of this phrase and the controversy surrounding it, see below 126-27 n. 8. 158 The verb dikaio,w occurs in 3:11, 24; 5:4; the noun dikaiosu,nh in 3:6, 21; 5:5; and the adjective dikaio,j in 3:8, 11. The related verb avdike,w also appears in 4:12. 159 For surveys of the lexical data of the OT, see David Hill, Greek Words and Hebrew Meanings: Studies in the Semantics of Soteriological Terms (SNTSMS 5; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1967), 82-98, and John A. Ziesler, The Meaning of Righteousness in Paul: A Linguistic and Theological Enquiry (SNTSMS 20; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972), 17-67. Analysis of this data generally divides between those who see the general sense of righteousness language as “accordance to a norm” and those who view it as “fidelity to relationship.” Not surprisingly, this split is reflected in discussions of Paul’s use of righteousness language. Most who line up with the “New Perspective” on Paul regard righteousness as covenant language, a view that, like many of the building blocks for the New Perspective, was prominently argued in E. P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A Comparison of Patterns of Religion (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1977), 198-205, and subsequently built upon in, e.g., Wright, What Saint Paul Really Said, 113-33, and


93

beyond the scope of this work, and ultimately unnecessary for our purpose. All that is necessary is to survey how dik– language (and the corresponding Hebrew qdc word family) is used in Isaiah in order to assess the extent to which Paul’s use of the same word group is dependent upon this Isaianic background.160 In the Hebrew text of Isaiah, words from the qdc family occur 81 times;161 in all but four cases they are rendered in the LXX with a word from the dik– group.162 The dik– word group appears 79 times, translating words from the qdc family all but four times.163 This significant

160

161 162

163

Dunn, Theology of Paul, 334-89. Substantive (and in our view largely persuasive) critiques of this view have been offered by, among others, Mark Seifrid; see Mark A. Seifrid, Christ, our Righteousness: Paul's Theology of Justification (New Studies in Biblical Theology; Downers Grove: IVP, 2000); Mark A. Seifrid, "Righteousness Language in the Hebrew Scriptures and Early Judaism," in Justification and Variegated Nomism 1: The Complexities of Second Temple Judaism (eds. D. A. Carson, Peter T. O'Brien, and Mark A. Seifrid; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001), 415-42; Mark A. Seifrid, "Paul's Use of Righteousness Language Against its Hellenistic Background," in Justification and Variegated Nomism 2: The Paradoxes of Paul (eds. D. A. Carson, Peter T. O'Brien, and Mark A. Seifrid; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2004), 39-74. In addition to his helpful critique of the “righteousness = covenant faithfulness” view, Seifrid rightly links righteousness language to God’s rule over creation, involving both salvation and judgment (see particularly Christ our Righteousness, 39-44), a component lacking in the discussions of Sanders, Dunn, Wright, et al. In this contention Seifrid follows the work of Hans H. Schmid, Gerechtigkeit als Weltordnung Hintergrund und Geschichte der alttestamentlichen Gerechtigkeitsbegriffes (BHT 40; Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 1968). For a succinct critique of the New Perspective, see especially Stephen Westerholm, Perspectives Old and New on Paul: The "Lutheran" Paul and His Critics (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 261-96. In addition to entries in the various theological dictionaries, treatments of righteousness language in Isaiah can be found in: Nigel M. Watson, "Some Observations on the Use of DIKAIOW in the Septuagint," JBL 79 (1960): 255-66; John J. Scullion, "Sedeqsedeqah in Isaiah cc 40–66 with Special Reference to the Continuity in Meaning between Second and Third Isaiah," UF 3 (1971): 335-48; C. F. Whitley, "Deutero-Isaiah's Interpretation of SEDEQ," VT 22 (1972): 469-75; John W. Olley, "Righteousness" in the Septuagint of Isaiah: A Contextual Study (SBLSCS 8; Missoula: Scholars, 1979); and John Oswalt, "Righteousness in Isaiah: A Study of the Function of Chapters 56–66 in the Present Structure of the Book," in Writing and Reading the Scroll of Isaiah: Studies of an Interpretive Tradition (ed. Craig C. Broyles and Craig A. Evans; VTSup 70.1; Leiden: Brill, 1997), 177-91; Thomas L. Leclerc, Yahweh is Exalted in Justice: Solidarity and Conflict in Isaiah (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2001), 29-178. The data are as follows: hq'd'c. (36x); qdci ![;m;l.) to make hr'AT great and glorious.”181 Within this context, it seems most natural to conclude that the hr'AT mentioned in 42:21 includes, but is not limited to, God’s revelation of himself in the Sinai covenant. 182 The final convergence of hr'AT and righteousness language comes in 51:4-7, a passage with several links to 42:1-8.183 In 51:4, hr'AT goes forth from Yahweh (rather than the Servant in 42:4), and is paralleled with justice ( jP'v.mi) being established as a light for the peoples (cp. 42:4, 6). Three verses later, the people addressed are referred to as “a people of my hr'AT in their hearts,” which runs parallel to “those who know righteousness” (51:7). Thus within three verses hr'AT is used on the one hand to refer to that which will go forth when Yahweh’s righteousness comes near (51:4), and on the other hand to divine instruction already lodged in the heart of Yahweh’s people.184 The result of this brief survey of the relationship between hr'AT and righteousness language can be summarized into three observations. First, the fact that these two concepts are found in close proximity in only three places suggests that Isaiah conceptualized the people’s sin primarily in terms of their rebellion against Yahweh, which secondarily found its expression in the violation of specific commandments. Second, hr'AT is linked to both the ethical (5:23-24; 51:7) and forensic/eschatological senses of righteousness (42:4, 21; 51:4-5).185 As a corol181 The presence of no,moj in 42:4 and 42:21 is uncertain in the LXX manuscripts. In 42:4, instead of evpi. tw/| no,mw| auvtou/ e;qnh evlpiou/sin, the codices read evpi. tw/| ovno,mati auvtou/ e;qnh evlpiou/sin, a reading that is reflected in Matt 12:21. Similarly, in 42:21 the LXX (Göttingen) makes “praises” (ai;nesin) the object that is made great, rather than “torah” as found in the MT; the LXX translator likely misread hr'AT (law) as hd'AT (praise). Symmachus later “corrects” the line to reflect the Hebrew more accurately by substituting no,mon for ai;nesin. On the uses of hr'AT in both 42:4 and 42:21, see Fischer, Tora für Israel, 79-99. 182 So Jensen, Use of tôrâ, 23; Oswalt, Isaiah 40–66, 132-33. 183 For careful treatment of hr'AT in Isa 51:4-7, see Fischer, Tora für Israel, 102-15. 184 Cp. the interesting conclusion of Fischer (Tora für Israel, 114), who at the end of his analysis of Isa 51:1-8 asks, “Was aber ist nun die Tora für Israel und die Völker? Für Israel als Volk, das die Tora bereits im Herzen hat, ist das aneignende Erinnern der im Buch der Tora aufgezeichneten Gottesgeschichte (51,1b-2) und das Hören auf die das frühere Heilshandeln aktualisierende Botschaft (V3) der zündende Funke zur Erkenntnis, daß Tora auch für die Völker bestimmt ist.” 185 Relevant here is the observation of Oswalt (“Righteousness,” 179-180) regarding the difference in perspective between the nature of salvation in Isa 1-39 as compared to Isa 40–55: “In chaps. 1–39 a right relationship with God is only possible in the light of the admission of the sin which has broken the relationship, a whole-hearted renunciation of that sin, and an equally wholehearted commitment to living a life of obedience. Unless justice is done and righteousness is lived out there can be no shelter from the storm of God’s wrath . . . . On the other hand, chaps. 40–55 present a radically different picture. They seem to suggest that obedience to the laws of God plays no part


99

lary, we may also note that when used in connection with forensic/eschatological righteousness, hr'AT is presented as the result of Yahweh’s righteousness being manifested, sent out to establish “right order” (jP'v.mi) not merely in Israel, but ultimately the ends of the earth (42:4; 51:4). Third, although the word hr'AT does not appear in chs. 56– 66, the summons to “do righteousness” (56:1) is certainly assumed to be expressed in terms of hr'AT obedience — sabbath keeping, offerings, and sacrifices to name just a few (56:1-8). Yet it must be emphatically stressed that chs. 56–66 do not in any sense make “doing righteousness” the grounds for enjoying Yahweh’s righteousness; “all our righteous acts [Wnyteqod>ci-lK'] are as garments of menstruation” (64:5 [Eng = 64:6]). Instead, the reverse is true: God’s people are to “do righteousness” because they have experienced Yahweh’s righteousness, and await its full manifestation.186 We are now in position to summarize righteousness language in Isaiah. In chs. 1–39, ethical righteousness is dominant, with the emphasis on doing what is right as defined by God. While this ethical righteousness does not entirely disappear in Isa 40–55, it recedes noticeably into the background, replaced by the forensic / eschatological aspect of righteousness. Noticeably missing in these chapters is any suggestion that obedience to Yahweh’s law plays any role whatsoever in God’s people experiencing Yahweh’s righteousness. Chapters 56–66 bring both ethical and forensic/eschatological righteousness together by stressing that God’s people should “do righteousness” because they await Yahweh’s righteousness. in either securing or maintaining a relationship with Him . . . . In a real sense these chapters teach us that salvation is by grace alone, that the only righteousness with which the elect must concern himself or herself is the saving righteousness of God” (“Righteousness,” 179-180, emphasis mine). These apparently divergent perspectives, according to Oswalt, are then synthesized in Isa 56–66. Although perhaps overstated, Oswalt’s observation on the “law-free” nature of salvation portrayed in Isa 40–55 is accurate, and certainly raises the possibility that Paul’s law-free gospel in Galatians is indebted to his reading of Isaiah 40–55. 186 See above, 96. It appears that the relationship between righteousness and torah in the Qumran community provides a contrast to the one found here in Isaiah (and as we will argue below, present in Paul as well). Passages such as 1QS 1:3-5, 13, 26; 8:2 (and perhaps 11:2-3) indicate that “even though saving divine intervention is still anticipated, the Qumran covenant does not save as a promise prior to and independent of obedience, but precisely as the ‘perfection of way’ in which righteousness is found” (Seifrid, “Hebrew Scriptures,” 435). Thus, “although Qumran authors speak of the present experience or hope of cleansing by God’s righteousness [e.g., 1QS 11:14; 1QH 11:30-31; 4Q370:2], there is no instance in the Qumran writings (or Hebrew Scriptures) in which God’s (plural) saving deeds of righteousness are said to purify from sin” (436). Instead, it was the righteous deeds of the individual that God would use to provide such cleansing.

100


How does this notion of righteousness comport with Paul’s in Gal 2:16-21? Paul uses righteousness language in the forensic/eschatological sense to speak of the status that the believer enjoys in God’s law court,187 a status which is utterly independent of one’s obedience to torah. In doing so, Paul may have taken his cue from Isa 40–55.188 But Paul does not abandon the notion of ethical righteousness in Galatians; in fact his discussion in Gal 5–6 of faith working through love and life in the Spirit as the believer awaits “the hope of righteousness” (Gal 5:6) is dependent upon key Isaianic texts such as 32:15-20; 57:15-21 and 63:11-15.189 But the argumentation for such a premise must await chapter four. Here we may emphasize that the similar development of righteousness language between Isaiah and Galatians provides sufficient reason to recognize a thematic parallel. Beginning in 2:18 there is a shift from first person plural pronouns to first person singular, as Paul moves from general principles to their application in his own life. After stating that he has been crucified with Christ, Paul claims “I no longer live, but Christ lives in me [evn evmoi,]” (2:20). A comparison with the two previous evn evmoi, phrases in 1:16 and 1:24 reveals a link to these two previous verses.190 Gal 1:16 avpokalu,yai to.n uiò.n auvtou/ evn evmoi,( i[na euvaggeli,zwmai auvto.n evn toi/j e;qnesin( euvqe,wj ouv prosaneqe,mhn sarki. kai. ai[mati

Gal 1:24

Gal 2:20

kai. evdo,xazon evn evmoi. to.n qeo,n

zw/ de. ouvke,ti evgw,( zh/| de. evn evmoi. Cristo,j\ o] de. nu/n zw/ evn sarki,( evn pi,stei zw/ th/| tou/ uiòu/ tou/ qeou/ tou/ avgaph,santo,j me kai. parado,ntoj eàuto.n u`pe.r evmou/Å

187 On the forensic/eschatological nature of righteousness and its relationship to the Law in Galatians, see esp. Herman Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 159-74; Moisés Silva, "Eschatological Structures in Galatians," in To Tell the Mystery: Essays on New Testament Eschatology in Honor of Robert H. Gundry (ed. Thomas E. Schmidt and Moisés Silva; JSNTSup 100; Sheffield, England: JSOT Press, 1994), 140-62, esp. 148-50; J. L. Martyn, Theological Issues in the Letters of Paul (Nashville: Abingdon, 1997), 141-56. Although they do not agree on the details, all three rightly recognize the eschatological flavor of righteousness in Galatians. For a contrasting, although not inherently contradictory view, that focuses more on the sociological aspects of justification, see James D. G. Dunn, "The Justice of God: A Renewed Perspective on Justification by Faith," JTS 43 (1992): 1-22. 188 See above, 95-96. 189 See below, 214-25. 190 See the commentaries of Betz (Galatians, 81), R. Longenecker (Galatians, 42), Dunn (Galatians, 91-92), and Hays (“Galatians,” 222-23); see also Ciampa, Presence and Function, 124; Lindars, New Testament Apologetic, 223; Kim, Paul and the New Perspective, 101. None of these scholars, however, develop the connection to any degree.


101

As we have argued above, in Gal 1:16 Paul is echoing portions of Isa 49, 52, and 53 when he claims that God delighted “to reveal his Son in me.”191 His claim that the Judean churches “were glorifying God in me” (1:24) was also demonstrated to be an echo of Isa 49:3 (reverberating from Gal 1:16), functioning as a statement that Isa 49:3 was already being fulfilled in his ministry.192 Here in Gal 2:20 we find Paul stating as a reality what he claimed happened in the Christophany: the revelation of God’s Son in Paul’s life. So complete was this revelation of Christ in Paul that he can claim that Christ lives in him, animating and empowering his life and ministry. When considered together these three verses reveal a progression: (1) God purposes to reveal his Son “in Paul” (1:16); (2) the Judean churches glorify God “in Paul” as a result of this divine purpose (1:24); (3) the divine purpose of revealing Christ “in Paul” is realized to such an extent that Paul can claim he no longer lives, but Christ lives “in him” (2:20). These connections suggest the presence of a further echo of Isa 49:3, though it is admittedly faint and largely dependent upon the observation of the previous echoes in 1:16 and 1:24, as well as the echo of Isa 49:4 in Gal 2:2. In addition to the link back to Gal 1:16 and 1:24 (and thus by extension Isa 49), there is another Isaianic allusion in 2:20, originating in Isa 53. We have already discussed the allusion to Isa 53 found in Gal 1:4. Our conclusion was that although Paul’s words align best with Isa 53:10, the fact that the allusion could also conceivably originate in 53:56 or 53:12 indicates that the allusion is in fact to the totality of Isa 53 rather than just to a specific line from it.193 In Gal 2:20, Paul once again alludes to Isa 53,194 but in a much different context than in 1:4. In his concluding remarks to Peter during the Antioch incident, Paul makes a series of statements concerning justification, the Law, and his own life/ministry. The nature of the passage leads him to personalize the allusion to Isa 53 in Gal 2:20, as a comparison with Gal 1:4 reveals: 195

191 192 193 194

See above 80-86. See above 87-89. See above 65-66. This allusion, and the link back to 1:4, are less frequently noted than the allusion to Isa 53 in 1:4. Among those who note both are Bruce, Galatians, 145-46 and Ciampa, Presence and Function, 210. 195 Rather than repeat our discussion of each individual portion of Isa 53 that the allusion may come from (see above, 56-66), a comparison of Gal 1:4 and 2:20 will be sufficient here.

102


Galatians 1:4 tou/ do,ntoj eàuto.n u`pe.r tw/n a`martiw/n h`mw/n( o[pwj evxe,lhtai h`ma/j evk tou/ aivwn/ oj tou/ evnestw/toj ponhrou/ kata. to. qe,lhma tou/ qeou/ kai. patro.j h`mw/n

Galatians 2:20 zw/ de. ouvke,ti evgw,( zh/| de. evn evmoi. Cristo,j\ o] de. nu/n zw/ evn sarki,( evn pi,stei zw/ th/| tou/ uiòu/ tou/ qeou/ tou/ avgaph,santo,j me kai. parado,ntoj eàuto.n u`pe.r evmou/Å

The similarities are readily apparent. Both contain a form of di,dwmi / paradi,dwmi with the reflexive pronoun eàuto,n as its object and Christ as the subject. In both cases a prepositional phrase beginning with u`pe,r modifies the verb. The significant difference lies in the objects of that preposition; in 1:4 it is tw/n a`martiw/n h`mw/n whereas in 2:20 it is simply evmou/. The move from stating that Christ gave himself “for our sins” to claiming that Christ gave himself “for me” personalizes the statement. Following as it does after his description of Christ as the one “who loved me [tou/ avgaph,santo,j me],” he claims that Christ gave himself specifically for Paul the individual. Christ’s action of giving himself for Paul is linked in this context not only to the cross (note the phrase Cristw/| sunestau,rwmai in 2:19), but also to his ongoing life and ministry. Although he still lives in the flesh (evn sarki,, 2:20), Paul asserts that Christ lives “in me [evn evmoi,].” So even though the connection rests on only a few words, the significance of those words, combined with the previous allusion to Isa 53 in Gal 1:4, is enough to establish the plausibility of a further allusion to Isa 53.

2.2.6 Summary: Isaianic Influence in Galatians 1–2 Our investigation of Galatians 1–2 has revealed numerous places where Paul’s language, theological reflection, and argumentation are shaped by his reading of Isa 40–66. No doubt some will regard one or more of the individual instances presented above as questionable, but in our estimation the cumulative force of these various examples of Paul’s indebtedness to Isaiah 40–66 are readily apparent. Even more specifically we have demonstrated that Isa 49–53 was particularly significant for Paul, as most (though not all) of the various allusions, echoes and thematic parallels discussed above come from these five chapters. Closer examination reveals that these examples of Isaianic influence primarily deal with Paul’s understanding of his apostolic call, ministry, and proclamation, and secondarily with the significance of Jesus’ death.

Synthesis

103

In the next section, we will explore what light Paul’s appropriation of Isa 49–53 sheds on these two themes, as well as the relationship between them.

2.3 Synthesis Synthesis Given the prominence of the allusions to and echoes of Isa 49–53 in Gal 1–2, we must ask the question how Paul is using these OT texts. 196 One might conclude that Paul’s use of Isa 49–53 is merely analogical or illustrative in nature, in which case Paul is merely noting similarities between his own call, ministry, and proclamation with portions of Isa 49– 53, without making any claim of an inherent relationship between the two. The major problem with such a view is the volume and recurrence of allusions/echoes of Isa 49–53 within Galatians 1–2, as well as their subtlety in several cases. Places where a NT author uses the OT analogically tend to be far more direct and concise.197 More commonly suggested is that Paul is using “stock-in-trade” language from the OT to describe his own apostolic call within the tradition of prophetic call narratives. 198 Based on the perceived similarities between not only the language of Isa 49:1-6 but other prophetic call narratives as well (including the calls of Abraham and Moses), 199 it is claimed that Paul is simply drawing upon a common way of describing a prophetic call.200 Further support for this view is claimed from the often-noted relationship between the apostolic office in the NT and the 196 For discussion of some of the different ways NT authors use the OT, see above, 37 n. 145. 197 The supreme example of this would be Heb 11, where the author cites several “examples” of faith to drive home to his audience the need to persevere in their own faith. 198 The most recent and substantive presentation of this view is found in Sandnes, Paul, 49-70; it should be noted that this is one small part of a much larger thesis. 199 On Abraham, see Carol K. Stockhausen, "2 Corinthians 3 and the Principles of Pauline Exegesis," in Paul and the Scriptures of Israel (ed. Craig A. Evans and James A. Sanders; JSNTSup 83/ SSEJC 1; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 143-64, esp. 152; on Moses, see Ciampa, Presence and Function, 119. 200 In addition to the OT evidence, Sandnes (Paul, 21-47) examines Sir 44–50 and finds that it confirms the OT picture of prophets as “predicters of future events, as miracle-workers, as preachers of repentance and as proclaimers of comfort” (38). He goes on to claim that because of his role as the preeminent proclaimer of eschatological comfort, Isaiah was regarded as the “consolation-prophet par excellence” (43). But what Sandnes does not show is the existence in Sir 44–50 of the formal elements of the prophetic call narratives that are so crucial to his larger argument. If this stockin-trade language for prophetic call narratives was so widely known, the evidence is lacking within the extant Second Temple literature.

104


prophetic office in the OT.201 After surveying these possibilities, Ciampa states this view concisely: Perhaps what should be said is that Paul’s narrative reflects the scriptural tradition (as seen in Abraham and Moses) that when God begins to do a new thing among his people he raises up a prophet (a category appropriate to both Abraham and Moses) and gives them a revelation of himself and of his plan for that person (and his people) which results in a radical upheaval and reorientation of that person’s life and work. Thus, it may be that common elements between the calling of Abraham, Moses and Paul are simply elements common to the concept of the “prophetic calling” in Scripture. This seems most likely since the clear allusions in 1:15-16 are to two similar descriptions of prophetic callings (Isa 49:1; Jer 1:5). Thus while it is possible that Paul has in mind some parallels between himself and Abraham or Moses (or both) it is more likely that his language here reflects the dramatic reorientation that is typical of the prophetic call.202

According to this view, the purpose of using this stock-in-trade language is to legitimize Paul’s claim of apostleship, much in the same manner that call narratives functioned in the OT to authenticate a person as prophet sent by Yahweh with his message.203 This “stock-in-trade” view has more to commend it than the analogical view, but still does not explain all the data. Two particular shortfalls may be noted. First, Paul’s account in Gal 1:11-17 does not include all of the formgeschichtlichen features of a prophetic call-narrative, nor can those who assess it from this perspective agree on where each element is found in Gal 1:11-17.204 Second, the number and volume of residual echoes from Isa 49:1-6 that reverberate elsewhere in Gal 1–2 indicate that something more than a general appropriation of a prophetic call narrative is taking place here.205 If Isa 49:1-6 is merely one of several 201 For two helpful reviews of the literature on this, see Agnew, “Origin,” 75-96 and Sandnes, Paul, 17-20. 202 Ciampa, Presence and Function, 119-20. 203 Cf. Sandnes, Paul, 67. 204 Cp. the differing assessments of Baird, “Visions,” 656-57; Newman, Paul’s GloryChristology, 204; and Donny R. Mathis, “The Prophetic Nature of Paul’s Call and its Implications for the Presence of the Restoration from the Exile Theme in Galatians” (paper presented at the annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, San Antonio, Tx, 19 November 2004), 2-15. Mathis’s observation that the “prophetic call narrative” of Gal 1:11-17 lacks a sign (given to provide reassurance to the prophet of God’s call through a symbol action), like the calls of Isaiah (Isa 6) and the Servant (Isa 49), is a further indicator that Paul is doing something more than appealing to the general prophetic tradition to authenticate his ministry. 205 Although he argues for a stock-in-trade understanding of the language in Gal 1:1516, several pages later Ciampa (Presence and Function, 125) seems to recognize the importance of the residual echoes of Isa 49:1-6: “The clearest and most significant scriptural influence [in Gal 1:13-24] seems to come from Isa 49. The fact that there

Synthesis

105

prophetic call passages that Paul draws upon in Gal 1:15-16, one must ask why there are residual echoes that surface at several points, while the other prophetic call texts do not appear again in Gal 1–2. Instead, then, of attributing the presence of allusions and echoes of Isa 49–53 to his appropriation of the prophetic call narrative, we should understand Paul’s use of these Isaianic chapters as indirect fulfillment.206 In other words, Paul sees his call as the apostle to the Gentiles prefigured in God’s commissioning of the Servant in Isa 49:1-6.207 Both the quantity and quality of the allusions and echoes of Isa 49–53 in Gal 1–2 indicate that Paul has framed the presentation of his apostolic call and ministry within this Isaianic framework.208 A brief review of the seem to be a number of echoes from Isa 49:1-6 in the first two chapters (and remembering that Paul quotes from this chapter in 2 Cor 6:2 and Rom 14:11) suggests that it was a very important text for Paul’s own self-concept and would most likely have been known to his churches as such. If this is correct, one may suspect that echoes from this passage would have been more readily detected by Paul’s readers than would echoes from many other parts of Scripture . . . . Each different echo adds to the growing assurance that Paul expects his readers to recognize the identification between God’s work in him and the ministry of Isaiah’s servant of the Lord.” This statement would seem to indicate that Ciampa may in fact see Paul’s use of Isa 49:1-6 in some sense of fulfillment; at the least there is some potential tension between these two statements that calls for further clarification. 206 See above, 37-38, for a discussion of nature of fulfillment, and the distinction between direct and indirect fulfillment. 207 Such a conclusion does not deny that other scriptural motifs played a role in Paul’s self-understanding. Even here in Gal 1–2 the presence of Jer 1:5 has often been noted, and our conclusion as to the primacy of Isa 49–53 does not exclude the presence of other such scriptural passages. However, no other single section of scripture even comes close in terms of the number of points of contact in Gal 1–2, and consequently some explanation for these phenomena must be given. 208 To our knowledge, there is no readily comparable example of a person unambiguously identifying himself as the Servant from Isaiah 49 within the Second Temple literature. Perhaps the closest parallel would be the Teacher of Righteousness within the Qumran community. As we have noted above (71 n. 86, 79 n. 113), the Teacher of Righteousness appears to apply servant language to himself in the Hodayot. But such a conclusion is not beyond dispute. Early in Qumran scholarship several scholars argued that the Teacher of Righteousness did in fact identify himself as the Isaianic Servant; see, e.g., Andre Dupont-Sommer, "Le rouleau des Hôdâyôt," Sem 7 (1957): 523; William H. Brownlee, "The Servant of the Lord in the Qumran Scrolls II," BASOR 135 (1954): 33-38; William H. Brownlee, "The Servant of the Lord in the Qumran Scrolls I," BASOR 132 (1953): 8-15; Matthew Black, "The Servant of the Lord and the Son of Man," SJT 6 (1953): 1-11. However, this view was quickly challenged by others; see, e.g., Jean Carmignac, "Les citations de l'Ancien Testament, et specialement des poèmes du Serviteur, dans les hymnes de Qumran," RevQ 2 (1959-1960): 357-94; Gert Jeremias, Der Lehrer der Gerechtigkeit (SUNT 2; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1963). Such critiques were deemed so decisive that the view was largely abandoned. Recently, however, the claim has been revived by two different scholars: Michael O. Wise, The First Messiah: Investigating the Savior before Jesus (San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1999) and Israel Knohl, The Messiah before Jesus: The Suffering Servant of the Dead Sea Scrolls (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2000). For a response

106


most significant allusions and echoes in Gal 1–2 will demonstrate this conclusion.

2.3.1 Paul as Servant of Yahweh in Isaiah 49 The starting point is Gal 1:15-16, where Isa 49:1-6 is the dominant text alluded to in Paul’s account of the Christophany. 209 So prominent is this text that it ripples throughout Gal 1–2, resurfacing in 1:24 (cp. 2:20); 2:2, 8-9, and, in all likelihood, in 1:10. Several portions of Isa 52–53 also surface repeatedly in Gal 1–2. In addition to the importance of Isa 52:5-7, 10 for the background of euvagge,lion / euvaggeli,zomai and eivrhnh,, we found reason to suspect the influence of those same verses in Gal 1:16 in the description of Paul’s call, as well as the scope of his mission in 2:2, 8-9. To a lesser degree we also observed the presence of Isa 53; in addition to the possibility of a faint echo to 53:1 in Gal 1:16, there are the two allusions made to 53:10 or 53:12 in Gal 1:4 and 2:20 in reference to Jesus’ substitutionary death. If Isa 49–53 was as significant for Paul’s apostolic selfunderstanding as we have demonstrated from Gal 1–2, we would expect to find allusions and echoes from these chapters in the other Pauline epistles where his apostolic ministry is discussed. Such confirmation is found in at least five places. 2.3.1.1 Romans 10:14-16210 We have already briefly noted the probability of an allusion to Isa 61:1 in addition to the citations of 52:7 and 53:1,211 but it is necessary to exto both Wise and Knohl, see John J. Collins, "Israel Knohl — The Messiah before Jesus: The Suffering Servant of the Dead Sea Scrolls," JQR 91 (2000): 185-90 and John J. Collins, "Teacher and Servant," RHPR 80 (2000): 37-50. But even if one grants that the Teacher of Righteousness considered himself to be in some sense the Servant of Isa 49, we must note that his role within the Qumran community was quite different from that of Paul within the early Christian movement, and as such provides a poor parallel to the apostle’s understanding of his mission. 209 Others who note the importance of Isa 49 for Paul’s self-understanding include Munck, Paul and the Salvation of Mankind, 24-35; Holtz, “Selbstverständnis,” 321-30; Kim, Origin of Paul’s Gospel, 91-99; Lloyd Gaston, Paul and the Torah (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1987), 6; Hans Hübner, Die Theologie des Paulus und ihre neutestamentliche Wirkungsgeschichte (Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testaments 2; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1993), 61-62; Ciampa, Presence and Function, 111-18, 125-27. 210 The best treatment of Isaianic influence in this passage is that of Wagner, Heralds, 170-80; our discussion here is indebted at several points to this work.

Synthesis

107

pand our discussion of Rom 10:14-16 here. Wagner has persuasively argued that Paul has modified Isa 52:7 in several keys ways to make clear that his proclamation of the gospel was prophesied by this text. 212 Paul’s use of swthri,a/sw,|zw in Rom 10:9, 10, 13 can also be linked to Isa 52:7b — “I will make your salvation [swthri,an] heard.” This emphasis on hearing the good news is then picked up in Rom 10:16 by citing Isa 53:1, which combines the notions of preaching, faith, and hearing: “Lord, who has believed [evpi,steusen] our message [avkoh/|]?” The linking of this message (avkoh,) with the “word of Christ [r`h,matoj Cristou/]” in Rom 10:17 indicates the probability that Paul is connecting “the word of Christ” to the suffering Servant described in Isa 52:13-53:12, and claiming that his gospel is in fact that which Isaiah proclaimed. 213 Wagner’s conclusion warrants citing at length: Paul finds not only that the gospel is announced beforehand in the scriptures; he also uncovers in Isaiah 52–53 a prophecy of his own crucial role in God’s redemptive plan. He is one of those depicted in Isaiah 52:7, a herald sent to broadcast the good news that God reigns, that Jesus is Lord. Through his apostolic ministry, people are able to hear, believe, and call upon the Lord. Tragically, he is also one who laments, “Lord, who has believed our report?” Confronted with the tragedy of Israel’s resistance to the gospel, Paul finds in Isaiah 53:1 that facing the unbelief of his own people is also part of God’s design for his ministry.214

Thus in Rom 10:14-16 we have the convergence of Paul’s apostolic selfunderstanding, the content of his gospel proclamation, and the linking

211 See above, 50. The fact that Paul appears to identify himself with the Servant of Isa 49:1-6, the herald of Isa 52:7 and the mysterious figure of Isa 61:1ff. raises the question as to what sort of connection (if any) Paul saw between the three figures. It seems unlikely that Paul saw them as exactly the same figure, since he appears to distinguish the herald of Isa 52:7 from the Servant of Isa 53. Instead, Paul likely observed the thematic connection between the three figures centered on the proclamation of Yahweh’s saving righteousness. Certainty, however, remains illusive given the lack of explicit Pauline treatment of the subject. 212 Wagner, Heralds, 173-74. The three key modifications are: (1) omitting the phrase evpi. tw/n ovre,wn to emphasize the broad scope of Christian proclamation; (2) omitting the phrase euvaggelizome,nou avkoh.n eivrh,nhj because he wants to reserve the word avkoh, for the word of Christ in Rom 10:16-17; (3) changing the singular euvaggelizo,menoj to the plural euvaggelizo,menwn to make explicit the identification of the heralds with Christian preachers. For additional differences between the two texts, see Koch, Schrift als Zeuge, 66-69; Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture, 134-41. On the possibility that Isa 53:1 was an early Christian testimonium, see Dodd, According to the Scriptures, 39. 213 Ibid., 180. An echo of Isa 53:1 is also found in Gal 3:2, 5; see below, 128-32. 214 Ibid., 180.

108


of Christ to the suffering Servant, all of which flow from Paul’s understanding of Isa 52–53.215 2.3.1.2 Romans 15:21216 Paul returns to the theme of his apostolic ministry in Rom 15:14-33 in an effort to explain his plan to visit Rome on the way to Spain. After speaking of what Christ has accomplished through him (15:18-19a), Paul claims that he has “fulfilled the gospel of Christ [peplhrwke,nai to. euvagge,lion tou/ Cristou/]” in the area stretching from Jerusalem to Illyricum (15:19b). He then expresses his desire to proclaim the gospel where Christ has not been named out of a desire not to build on anyone else’s foundation (15:20). Paul’s approach is then grounded in a citation of the last half of Isa 52:15, taken directly from the LXX — “for those who had not been told about him will see, and those who have not heard will understand.” We have already explored Paul’s citations of Isa 52:7 and 53:1 in our discussion of Rom 10:14-16, but this citation of Isa 52:15 warrants further examination. In its original context, the “they” of Isa 52:15 refers to the kings who will shut their mouths on account of the suffering servant; as such there is a connection back to Isa 49:7 — “Kings will see him [the Servant who is despised and abhorred] and rulers will worship him for Yahweh’s sake.” Within Isa 52:13-53:12, 52:15 provides the transition between the prologue of the servant song (52:13-15) and the song itself (53:1-12),217 and we have already noted that Paul cites Isa 52:7 and 53:1 in Rom 10:14-16.218 This conglomeration of citations from the same section of Isaiah, dealing with the same theme of Paul’s apostolic ministry, clearly reveals the significance of Isa 52–53, and with its links back to Isa 49 suggests an even broader scope to Paul’s appropriation of this Isaianic material.219 215 Cp. the conclusion of Wilk (Bedeutung, 363), who after his analysis of Paul’s use of Isaiah in Rom 9–11, states “Abschließend ist nach den Abschnitten zu fragen, die Paulus ohne nennenswerte Unterschiede mehrfach rezipiert. Hier sind primär Jes 426 493-13 527-15 und 5311f. zu nennen. Diese Kombination von Passagen ist höchst bemerkenswert; sie enthält namlich fast vollständig die von ihm auf sein apostolisches Selbstverständnis gedeuteten Texte.” 216 Again, our discussion here is indebted to Wagner, Heralds, 329-36; see also Wilk, Bedeutung, 80-81, 175-76, 233-35, 355-56, 392-94; O’Brien, Gospel and Mission, 27-51. 217 So also Childs, Isaiah, , 412-13. 218 So Wagner, Heralds, 334. 219 After examining Paul’s use of Isa 52–53 in both Rom 10:14-16 and 15:20-21, Wagner further draws in the probable allusions to Isa 53:6, 11-12 in Rom 4:25, 5:15-19 and 8:32 before concluding: “In the context of Romans, the ‘him’ of whom they have not heard or been told, but whom they shall see and understand (Isa 52:15), is Christ

Synthesis

109

2.3.1.3 2 Corinthians 6:2 In 2 Cor 2:14–6:13 Paul gives the lengthiest explanation and defense of his apostolic ministry. In 5:20, Paul refers to himself (as well as his coworkers) as an ambassador for Christ, through whom God appeals to human beings to be reconciled to himself. Therefore, Paul works together with God in urging the Corinthians “not to receive the grace of God in vain [eivj keno,n]” (6:1).220 Immediately following this Paul cites Isa 49:8 as what God is saying through them: “At the acceptable time I heard you; on the day of salvation I came to your aid” (6:2). Notably, Isa 49:8 contains the words of Yahweh to the Servant, whereas Paul seems to present them as the words of the Lord to the Corinthians through Paul and his missionary team. In other words, Paul is claiming that through his proclamation of the gospel the acceptable time and the day of salvation have come, but those who fail to respond end up receiving the grace of God (as revealed in Paul’s gospel) in vain. 221 To reject Paul’s words is to reject the God who pleads through him, and thus to cut oneself off from the grace of God offered in the cross of Christ. Similar to what we have discovered in Gal 1–2, there are several other allusions and echoes to Isa 40–66 throughout 2 Cor 5–7;222 even more significant are the number of additional allusions and echoes of Isa 49–53. In addition to the echo of 49:4 in 6:1 and the citation of 49:8 in 6:2, Paul cites Isa 52:11 in 6:17 as direct application to the Corinthians. Most intriguing is the argument of Otto Hofius “daß die in 2Kor 5 enhaltenen Aussagen über den stellvertretenden Sühnetod Jesu deutlich in dem Gottesknecht-Lied Jes 52,13–53,12 vorgezeichnet sind.”223 Hofius then links this to the proclamation of Paul’s gospel as

220 221

222 223

(Rom 15:20). The ‘good things’ announced by the messengers of Isaiah 52:7 and the content of the rejected ‘message’ of Isaiah 53:1, according to Paul, is the r`h/ma Cristou/ (Rom 10:17). Paul completes two stages of the equation: (1) Heralds of Isaiah 52-53 = Paul and other preachers of the gospel; (2) Message concerning the return from exile and the servant of the Lord = gospel of Christ. Though the last step of the equation, (3) Servant = Christ, remains unarticulated, it lingers behind the text as a virtually unavoidable implication of Paul’s larger reading of Isaiah” (Heralds, 335). Our analysis will reveal a similar pattern in Galatians. As noted above, this is likely an allusion to Isa 49:4; on the importance of Isa 49 in this passage, see Beale, “Reconciliation in 2 Corinthians 5–7,” 227-31. Beale’s conclusion on the significance of Isa 49:8 in 2 Cor 6:1-2 is right in line with our proposal for Gal 1–2 — “In radical fashion Paul applies to himself a prophecy of the Isaianic Servant, probably in order to identify himself with that figure. He is in some way the fulfillment of the righteous ‘Servant, Israel’ (Isa 49:3) who was to proclaim restoration to sinful Israel” (“Reconciliation in 2 Corinthians 5–7,” 229). The most extensive treatment of these is found in Beale, “Reconciliation in 2 Corinthians 5–7,” 217-47. Hofius, Paulusstudien, 1-14, esp. 11.

110


portrayed in 2 Cor 5:18-6:2 to that foretold in Isa 52:6-10, and concludes, “Aus der Zusammenschau der — christologisch gedeuteten — Texte Jes 52, 13–53, 12 und Jes 52, 6-10 ergab sich somit für Paulus, daß Gottes Heilshandeln beides umfaßt: das Kreuzesgeschehen als die den universalen »Frieden« schaffende Tat und die Kreuzesverkündigung als das den »Frieden« weitweit proklamierende Wort.”224 A similar pattern may be observed in Galatians as well. 2.3.1.4 Ephesians 2:17 We have already mentioned in passing Paul’s conflated citation of Isa 57:19 and 52:7 in Ephesians 2:17.225 Our conclusion there was that Paul’s contextually sensitive handling of Isa 52:7 and 57:19 provides a clear link between the concepts of peace and reconciliation as an outgrowth of his reflection upon Jesus’ death against the backdrop of Yahweh’s promised salvation in Isa 40–66. While it is true that Paul does not explicitly refer to his apostolic ministry in 2:11-22, he does refer in passing to the apostles and prophets as the foundation of God’s house (2:19-20). Furthermore, while he refers to Christ as the one who “preached peace” to the Ephesians (2:17), Paul clearly implies that Christ preached that peace through him. He does, however, in 3:2-13, devote significant space to his calling as the apostle to the Gentiles, and his discussion of the subject must have had at least some connection to what Paul has just finished arguing in 2:11-22. Although not as conclusive as some of the other passages mentioned, Eph 2:17 and its surrounding context at least suggests the same link between Paul’s apostolic ministry and his understanding of Isa 52–53. 2.3.1.5 Philippians 2:16 After exhorting the Philippians to be blameless and to hold fast to the gospel, Paul gives the reason for this command: “so that I may boast in the day of Christ because I did not run in vain [eivj keno.n e;dramon] or labor in vain [ouvde. eivj keno.n evkopi,asa]” (2:16). This last phrase closely echoes the Servant’s claim, “I labored in vain [kenw/j evkopi,asa]” from Isa 49:4.226 What follows is an expression of Paul’s confident joy that as his 224 Ibid., 12. 225 See above, 53-54. 226 Those who recognize an echo of Isa 49:4 include: W. Radl, "Alle Mühe umsonst? Paulus und der Gottesknecht," in L'Apôtre Paul: Personnalité, Style et Conception du Ministère (ed. Albert Vanhoye; BETL 73; Leuven: Leuven University Press, 1986), 14449; Peter T. O'Brien, The Epistle to the Philippians: A Commentary on the Greek Text

Synthesis

111

life is poured out as a drink offering, it will result in joy for the Philippian believers. Two additional factors from the context make the probability of an allusion to Isa 49 here likely. First, the Christ-hymn of 2:611 contains allusions to both Isa 45:23 and 53:3, 11 in its description of Jesus, as well as possible echoes of Isa 49:1-6;227 these references show that the larger Isaianic context is in mind. Second, Paul refers to the Philippians as “lights in the world [fwsth/rej evn ko,smw|]” in 2:15, a possible allusion to Isa 49:6 (“a light to the nations [fw/j evqnw/n]”). These additional echoes make an allusion to Isa 49:4 in Phil 2:16 at least possible, if not probable. Again, we may observe that the context is related to Paul’s apostolic ministry, but in a slight twist from the other passages we have examined the language of Isa 49 is transferred to believers in general rather than restricted to Jesus, Paul, or the proclaimers of the gospel. 2.3.1.6 Acts 13:47 In addition to Paul’s own testimony to the importance of Isa 49 for his apostolic ministry, we also have corroborating evidence from Acts.228 Within Luke-Acts, Isa 49:6 in particular appears at significant points in the narrative and provides key links between various points in Luke’s account.229 The first appearance is Luke 2:32, where Simeon describes the infant Jesus as “a light for revelation to the Gentiles and the glory of your people Israel” (cp. Isa 49:6, and possibly 49:3). This pronouncement by Simeon helps to establish who Jesus is and the extent of the salvation he will bring, and the appropriation of Isa 49:6 (and possibly 49:3) serves to link the mission of the Servant to Jesus. At the conclusion (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), 300-301; Markus N. A. Bockmuehl, The Epistle to the Philippians (BNTC 11; Peabody: Hendrickson, 1998), 159-60. 227 The allusion to Isa 45:23 LXX in Phil 2:10-11 is widely recognized, but Grelot (Poèmes, 147-48) has plausibly argued for the possible presence of Isa 49:1-6 and portions of Isa 52:13-53:12 as well. He notes the following: (1) the use of dou/loj has parallels in Isa 49:3, 6 and emphasizes the lowly condition of the Servant; (2) the final servant song (52:13-53:12) begins with the exaltation of the servant (u`yo,w; 52:13), while Phil 2:9 uses a similar verb (u`peruyo,w) to speak of Christ’s exaltation; (3) the same contrast between the humiliation and the exaltation of Christ in Phil 2:6-11 is present in the final servant song, although the order is reversed (exaltation = 52:13, humiliation 53:12; (4) the description of Christ humbling himself (tapeino,w) is similar to the description of the humility (tapei,nwsij) of the servant in Isa 53:8. An additional link may also be found in the climax of the Christ-hymn, where the exaltation of Christ is linked to the glory (do,xa) of the Father (2:11); in Isa 52:13 the ideas of exaltation and glorification (doxa,zw) are also closely linked. 228 On the value of Acts for reconstructing the early Christian movement in general and Paul’s life in particular, see above, 18-19 n. 71. 229 See Pao, Acts, 96-101.

112


of Luke (24:46-47), Jesus sums up the OT witness concerning himself by using dei/ plus three infinitives: suffer (paqei/n), rise (avnasth/nai), and proclaim (khrucqh/nai). Pao has persuasively shown that based on the close parallel to Acts 1:8, we should understand the proclamation of repentance to all the nations as having its background in Isa 49:6.230 This idea of proclamation is then amplified in Acts 1:8, where the phrase “to the end of the earth” is likely drawn from Isa 49:6 and used to announce the expansion of the gospel among the Gentiles. Isaiah 49:6 is explicitly cited in Acts 13:47, which we will examine in more detail momentarily. The point to be drawn from this very brief summary is that Luke uses Isa 49:6 at key points in his narrative as a thread to tie together the ministry of Jesus and that of his apostolic representatives. Luke’s account of Paul and Barnabas in Pisidian Antioch (13:13-52) plays an important role in the structure of Luke-Acts in that it marks Paul as the central figure of the remainder of Acts, provides a sample of his synagogue preaching, and establishes a pattern of response to the gospel whereby the Jews reject it and the Gentiles embrace it.231 Paul’s heilsgeschichtlicher sermon traces God’s dealings with his people from the exodus to the present day, with special attention given to David. Within this framework Paul places Jesus’ death and resurrection right at the center, claiming it is the focal point of God’s promises to Israel, and in particular David.232 While the initial response to Paul’s message is promising (13:42-43), things quickly change the next Sabbath, as the Jews began to vigorously argue with Paul, charging him with blasphemy (13:44-45). It is in response to this opposition that Paul cites Isa 49:6. 233 The citation is introduced with the clause “in this way the Lord commanded us,” though the text does not indicate when or how this took place. This 230 Pao, Acts, 84-91. 231 On the shift to Paul as the main character of Acts, see Robert C. Tannehill, The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts: A Literary Interpretation (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986-1990), 2:160-61; James D. G. Dunn, The Acts of the Apostles (Valley Forge, Pa: Trinity Press International, 1996), xiv-xv; on Acts 13:16-41 as a sample of Paul’s synagogue preaching, see Matthäus F.-J. Buss, Die Missionspredigt des Apostels Paulus im pisidischen Antiochien: Analyse von Apg 13, 16-41 im Hinblick auf die literarische und thematische Einheit der Paulusrede (FB 38; Stuttgart: Verlag Katholisches Bibelwerk, 1980), 1-151; Witherington, Acts of the Apostles, 408-9; on the pattern of Jewish rejection and Gentile acceptance of the gospel, see Pao, Acts, 217-48. 232 In passing it should be noted that Paul cites Isa 55:3 (Acts 13:34), which in its original context is part of an appeal to respond to the salvation accomplished by the Servant in Isa 53. 233 The wording of this citation matches the LXX of Isa 49:6 with the exception of the omission of the phrase eivj diaqh,khn ge,nouj; for a discussion of the possible reasons for such an omission, see Pao, Acts, 96-97, and the bibliography cited there.

Synthesis

113

command of the Lord is expressed by citing Isa 49:6, which is a description of the Servant’s mission. In other words, Paul is presented as identifying his present missionary work with the Servant’s mission, 234 and although he does not explicitly use the language of fulfillment, his use of Isa 49:6 certainly implies it. That the citation of Isa 49:6 in Acts 13:47 should be understood in terms of fulfillment is further confirmed by the previous use of Isa 49:6 at key points in Luke-Acts noted above. Based on an initial reading of 13:46, one might conclude that the citation of Isa 49:6 that follows is nothing more than a response to Jewish rejection of the gospel, but the programmatic function of Isa 49:6 throughout Luke-Acts will not permit such a conclusion. In addition, then, to responding to Jewish rejection of the gospel, the citation of Isa 49:6 signals the inauguration of a period during which Gentiles will become the majority within the people of God.235 Furthermore, the citation of Isa 49:6 establishes the framework of Paul’s ministry that is played out in the remaining chapters of Acts and marks the acceleration of the spread of the gospel “to the ends of the earth” (Acts 13:47; cp. 1:8).236 Three features of this account are particularly pertinent for our study. First, Luke’s account provides external confirmation of the importance of Isa 49 for Paul’s apostolic self-understanding. When one considers that Luke was a companion of Paul during portions of his missionary work, the value of Luke’s testimony is further enhanced. 237 Further evidence may also be drawn from the Isaianic allusions and 234 Instead of seeing Paul and Barnabas as the fw/j of Acts 13:47 // Isa 49:6, some argue that Christ is the referent; see, e.g., Pierre Grelot, "Note sur Actes, XIII, 47," RB 88 (1981): 368-72. The context, however, does not make such a reading likely. Furthermore, as our discussion below will show, forcing too rigid a distinction between Christ as the light and Paul/Barnabas as the light fails to appreciate the way Luke identifies Christ’s witnesses with Christ himself. 235 Pao, Acts, 98. The fact that Paul continues to preach in the synagogues (Acts 14:1; 17:1, 10, 17; 18:4, 19; 19:8) throughout the rest of Acts makes it clear that the “turn to the Gentiles” does not mean he no longer seeks to preach Christ to the Jews. Such a practice was rooted not merely in expediency, but rather in a deeply held theological belief that the gospel was “the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek” (Rom 1:17). Luke’s argument about the prominence of the Gentiles in the present era of God’s economy has affinities to Paul’s argument in Rom 11:11-32 about the fullness of the Gentiles and the salvation of Israel. 236 Pao, Acts, 99-100. 237 Although the claim that Luke was a travelling companion of Paul is rejected by many scholars, a compelling case can be made for such an assertion. See, e.g., the following: Hemer, Book of Acts, 308-34; Witherington, Acts of the Apostles, 51-60, 480-86; Darrell L. Bock, Acts (BECNT; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007), 15-19; W.S. Campbell, The ‘We’ Passages in the Acts of the Apostles: The Narrator as Narrative Character (SBLSBL 14; Atlanta: SBL, 2007).

114


echoes present in the three accounts Luke provides of Paul’s calling/conversion.238 These lines of evidence converge to demonstrate clearly the significance of Isa 49 for Paul’s self-understanding. Second, the Servant’s mission is extended beyond Paul (or the apostolic band for that matter) to include at least Barnabas. When the parallels between Acts 13:47 and 1:8 are accounted for, it becomes evident that the Servant’s mission expressed in Isa 49:6 is applied at least to the apostolic band, and likely beyond to all Jesus’ followers. We have already noted a similar dynamic in Paul’s use of Isa 52:7 in Rom 10:15, where Paul transforms the singular herald of Isa 52:7 into the plural to refer to present-day preachers of the gospel, including himself.239 What begins in Luke-Acts as a description of Jesus’ mission in Luke 2:32 is also applied to his followers in Luke 24:46-49, Acts 1:8 and 13:47. Third, Luke’s application of Isa 49:6 to Jesus, the apostles, Paul and Barnabas, and ultimately to all Jesus’ followers suggests a deeper underlying theological structure. Jesus is clearly identified as the light of revelation to the Gentiles in Luke 2:32, while Paul and Barnabas are just as clearly identified as a light to the Gentiles in Acts 13:47. How then are these two claims related? The intervening allusions to Isa 49:6 in Luke 24:46-49 and Acts 1:8 provide the key. In both of those texts, the very mission of Jesus (the Servant of Isa 49:6) as light to the nations is transferred to his witnesses. But something more than mere transferal is taking place, because the mission of Christ’s witnesses is explicitly linked to the gift of the Spirit. The Spirit is the manifestation of the presence of the risen Christ among his witnesses, to such a degree that the risen Christ works in and through his witnesses to carry forth the mission of being a light to the nations. That is how Luke can apply the mission of the Servant in Isa 49:6 to both Jesus and his followers.240 238 See Lucien Cerfaux, "Saint Paul et le serviteurdeDieu d'Isaïe," in Recueil Lucien Cerfaux: Études d'Exegèse et d'Histoire Religieuse de Monseigneur Cerfaux (ed. Lucien Cerfaux; BETL VI-VII; Gembloux: University of Louvain, 1954), 439-54, esp. 442-44; W. P. Bowers, "Studies in Paul's Understanding of His Mission" (Ph.D. diss., Cambridge, 1976), 135-43; Sandnes, Paul, 73-76. 239 See above, 106-8. 240 Rather than seeing the Spirit as the connection point, Buss (Missionspredigt, 139) concludes that the proclamation of salvation bridges the two: “Die Interpretation von Jes 49,6 auf die Missionare, besonders auf Paulus hin schließt ein christologisches Verständnis dieses Zitats durchaus ein; durch seine Verkündigung will Paulus Christus zu den Heiden bringen. Der lo,goj swthri,aj (vgl. v. 26) erhält somit einen „hypostatischen“ Charakter; im Heilswort ist der swth,r selbst gegenwärtig. Von dieser lukanischen Wort-Theologie her eröffnet sich auch das Verständnis von Apg 26,18.23: die Sendung Pauli (vgl. Apg 26,28) ist die gleiche wie die des auferstandenen Herrn (vgl. Apg 26,23), oder besser gesagt: der Apostel predigt „im Namen“ des Auferstandenen.” Buss has clearly identified an important

Synthesis

115

2.3.1.7 Summary Our survey of Paul’s letters and the testimony of Acts corroborates the importance of Isa 49–53 for the understanding of his apostolic calling. While such a conclusion has been reached by numerous others, 241 the unique contribution of this study has been to provide significant exegetical rooting from within Galatians. Yet Paul does more than identify himself with the Servant in Isa 49–53; he also regards Jesus as the Servant as well, and it is to this observation that we must now turn.

2.3.2 Jesus as the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 Our analysis of Gal 1:4 and 2:20 above demonstrated the influence of Isa 53 upon the formulation of Jesus’ death. 242 Again, we are not the first to argue this; numerous others have reached similar conclusions. 243 However, the specific contribution of Paul’s references in Gal 1:4 and 2:20 has not been fully appreciated, so a few comments about Paul’s use of Isa 53 here are in order. The use of Isa 53 in Gal 1:4 is unique in Paul’s letters in at least one sense: the explicitly apocalyptic framework within which it is placed.244

241 242

243 244

element linking Christ and his witnesses, but we remain persuaded that the presence of the Spirit in the lives of Christ’s witnesses remains the more prominent motif in Acts. See especially Cerfaux, “Saint Paul,” 439-54; Kim, Origin of Paul’s Gospel, 90-99; idem, Paul and the New Perspective, 101-27; Hays, “Who Has Believed,” 205-225; Wagner, Heralds, 170-80, 329-36. In a monograph nearly 50 years ago, Morna Hooker famously argued that Jesus himself was not significantly influenced by the Servant passages, and saw little reason to conclude that Paul connected Jesus’ death to Isa 53; see Morna D. Hooker, Jesus and the Servant: The Influence of the Servant Concept of Deutero-Isaiah in the New Testament (London: S.P.C.K, 1959), 116-23, 127. More recently, however, she has expressed openness to the possibility that the connection between Jesus’ death and Isa 53 may have first been made by Paul in Rom 4:25; see, “Did the Use,” 101-103. While we are persuaded that this connection goes all the way back to Jesus himself (for a careful critique of Hooker’s thesis and methodology, see Moo, Gospel Passion Narratives, 162-72), Hooker’s concession that Paul (at least in Rom 4:25) speaks of Jesus’ death in the language of Isa 53 certainly adds weight to the possibility of our argument here. See n. 38 above. Perhaps the closest parallel may be found in Titus 2:12-14, where the self-giving of Christ is linked to a godly life in the present age (tw/| nu/n aivwn/ i in Titus 2:12; cp. to tou/ aivw/noj tou/ evnestw/toj ponhrou/ in Gal 1:4) and his return. But despite some similarity in vocabulary, the two passages are subtly different. In Gal 1:4, the vicarious death of Christ rescues believers from (evk) the present evil age, while in Titus 2:12-14 Christ’s self-giving redeems believers from lawless deeds to live godly lives in (evn) the present age.

116


Christ’s self-giving death for sins, as will become clear from the remainder of Galatians, was the defining moment in God’s dealings with the world. The cross signals that the turn of the ages has come, and those aligned with Christ have been freed from slavery to this “present evil age” with all of its accoutrements (power of sin, the law, and the “elemental things”).245 Because of Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection, the long-awaited messianic age has begun; God’s work of new creation has been inaugurated, the Spirit has been poured out, and God’s people now live in the freedom that Christ has purchased for them at the cross. No doubt part of the reason for Paul’s apocalyptic emphasis stems from the situation in Galatia itself. Paul’s opponents seem to have held such a strong view of continuity between the time before and after the cross that the Law of Moses was barely even affected by the death and resurrection of Jesus. Against such a radical continuity Paul responds by stressing the decisive discontinuity that the cross has brought about, and aligning the Mosaic Law with the present evil age rather than the newly inaugurated messianic era.246 His opponents still considered the Law as the centerpiece of God’s dealing with humanity, the means by which humans were to relate to God and one another. But all that changed at the cross; Christ is now at the turning point in God’s interaction with the world, and the Law was no longer the way humanity was to interact with God or others. Saul the Pharisee has come a long way. As for Paul’s use of Isa 53 in Gal 2:20, the distinctive feature is clearly the personalized nature of the reference, perhaps the most personal expression of Christ’s death found in the entire NT. The selfgiving of Christ is made parallel to Christ’s love for Paul the individual, an emphasis found nowhere else explicitly in the NT. 247 In light of Paul’s account of persecuting the church in 1:13-14, one can almost sense the wonder in Paul’s words that Christ would love even him and give himself for Paul the former enemy of the gospel. Christ’s love and self-giving were not merely for the church considered as a group of 245 Martyn, Galatians, 101; see also Bruce W. Longenecker, The Triumph of Abraham's God: The Transformation of Identity in Galatians (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1998), 45-48; Beker, Paul the Apostle, 189-92. 246 On the sharp discontinuity between the old age and the newly inaugurated Messianic age, see esp. Beker, Paul the Apostle, 235-54; Martyn, Theological Issues, 111-40, 23550. Paul’s emphasis on discontinuity here in Galatians should not blind the reader to the points of continuity he sketches out as well. Most notable is his identification of Christ as the seed of Abraham, and thus the rightful heir of the promises made to him (3:6-29). 247 The closest one finds are Eph 5:2, 25. In the former, Christ is described as loving believers and giving himself up for them (including Paul), while in the latter Christ is described as loving the church and giving himself up for “her.”

Synthesis

117

people, but it was for the individuals who compose that church, even Saul the persecutor. Thus Galatians 1:4 and 2:20 confirm that Paul understood the death of Jesus (at least in part) in light of the suffering servant portrayed in Isa 53.248 If Galatians is in fact one of the earliest documents in the NT, these references to Jesus’ death in connection with Isa 53 may provide one of the earliest written evidences of such a connection, and their proximity to probable liturgical or traditional pieces suggests that Jesus’ death and Isa 53 were brought together at the earliest stages of the Christian movement, raising the question whether such a tradition may have even stemmed from Jesus himself.

2.3.3 “Christ Lives in Me” To this point we have proposed that Paul’s description of his apostolic calling and ministry in Gal 1–2 reveals that he understands this calling as a fulfillment of the Servant’s mission of Isa 49. At the same time, we have also observed that he refers to Jesus’ death in the language of Isa 53. The question we must now address is how these two strands are woven together.249 As one of the earliest to identify the importance of Isa 49–53 for Paul’s self-understanding, Lucien Cerfaux posited the relationship as one of delegation: “En bref, le Christ délégue saint Paul pour achever la réalisation de l’œuvre du Serviteur telle qu’elle est décrite dans l’Ancien Testament.”250 Seyoon Kim, reflecting on the importance of Isa 42 for Paul’s self-understanding, has argued for a similar representa248 Cp. the conclusion of Florian Wilk: “findet Paulus bei Jesaja Hinweise auf das Geschick Jesu Christi: auf sein Leiden für andere und die ihm widerfahrene Verachtung, auf seinen — als stellvertretende Hingabe verstandenen — Tod sowie auf seine Auferstehung und seine Erhöhung zu Gott. Beachtlichen Raum nimmt sodann die Charakterisierung des Dienstes ein, den Jesus Christus auf diese Weise „den Vielen“ erwiesen hat: Er nimmt ihre Sünden auf sich und befreit sie von ihrer schuldbeladenen Gechichte, erleidet also an ihrer Stelle das Gericht Gottes; zugleich eröffnet er ihnen eine neue Lebenswirklichkeit im Kraftfeld der Versöhnung, so daß Menschen Frieden empfangen, die „Niedrigen“ Trost finden und den in der Finsternis Gefangenen ein Licht aufgeht” (Bedeutung des Jesajabuches, 365). 249 While a number of scholars have made the link between Paul’s self-understanding and the Servant passages (see discussion above, 106-15), far fewer have explored how this link relates to Paul’s presentation of Jesus’ death in language taken from Isa 53. Yet Paul’s juxtaposition of the two here in Galatians seems to require some attempt to penetrate the connection between the two. 250 Cerfaux, “Saint Paul,” 452. Cp. the similar conclusion of Beale (“Reconciliation in 2 Corinthians 5–7,” 230-31), who views the relationship in terms of corporate respresentation.

118


tional understanding, but moves beyond Cerfaux to emphasize Christ “fulfilling the Ebed’s role through Paul.”251 Kim’s conclusion is largely based on Paul’s language of Christ working through him (Rom 15:1819), and is good as far as it goes. 252 But in our estimation it does not go far enough; something more than representation is taking place here. Closer to the mark is Florian Wilk, who rightly observes that Paul draws upon Isaiah when speaking both of Christ’s death and Paul’s self-understanding, even noting the importance of the Servant passages for both. Yet the closest that Wilk comes to integrating the two is a few brief lines on Paul’s suffering, with regard to which he states “in seiner Person kommt das Christusgeschehen zur Darstellung.” 253 Unfortunately, Wilk does not develop this insight, nor does he apply it beyond Paul’s suffering. What he offers in almost passing fashion in reality provides the key for unlocking the relationship between Paul as the Servant of Yahweh from Isa 49 and Jesus as the Servant of Yahweh from Isa 53. The central passage is Gal 2:20, where Paul states “I no longer live, but Christ lives in me [evn evmoi,]. And the life I now live in the flesh, I live by faith in the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me [parado,ntoj eàuto.n u`pe.r evmou/].” As noted above, the phrase evn evmoi, is an echo of Isa 49:3, while the clause parado,ntoj eàuto.n u`pe.r evmou/ is Paul’s personalization of language borrowed from Isa 53.254 Here in one verse we have the two themes of Paul’s self-understanding and Jesus’ vicarious death brought together, both using language taken from the Servant passages (Isa 49, 53). The bridge between the two is Paul’s participation in Christ’s crucifixion, and his subsequent indwelling of Paul, 255 which is so complete that Paul can actually claim that he no longer lives.256 When God delighted to reveal his Son “in” Paul on the Damas251 Kim, Paul and the New Perspective, 127. 252 In connection with his conclusion, Kim does refer the reader to Gal 2:20 as further evidence of Christ working through Paul, but in our estimation he fails to realize that Gal 2:20 speaks of more than just Christ working through Paul, as our discussion will show. 253 Wilk, Bedeutung des Jesajabuches, 368. 254 See above, 100-2. 255 Paul much more frequently speaks of the believer being “in Christ” than he does of Christ dwelling in the believer, as he does here. While it is probably true that the two ideas are different sides of the same coin, there is at least a point of emphasis by speaking of Christ dwelling in Paul. By stressing that Christ dwells in him, Paul is able to reinforce his unique status as the specially commissioned apostle to the Gentiles. 256 As if sensing the potential for misunderstanding, Paul qualifies his statement by claiming that the life he lives now in the flesh, he lives “by faith in the son of God [evn pi,stei … th/| tou/ uiòu/ tou/ qeou/]” (Gal 2:20). It is not as if Paul has been swallowed up

Synthesis

119

cus road and commissioned him to proclaim the gospel to the Gentiles, the old Paul was crucified. The Paul whose identity and selfunderstanding were inseparably tied to the Law and a pharisaical zeal to preserve the distinctiveness of the Jewish people died that day, and in his place arose the suffering (and vindicated) Servant of Yahweh, Jesus Christ. From that point forward, Paul’s identity and selfunderstanding were overtaken by Christ the Servant, resulting in a new zeal to be Christ’s instrument in taking the gospel to the Gentiles. In other words, Jesus Christ the suffering Servant of Isa 53, who gave himself for Paul, now lives in Paul to carry out the mission of the Servant portrayed in Isa 49 to be a light to the nations. Because of this truth, Paul can refer to his own apostolic mission as the fulfillment of the Servant’s commission in Isa 49 to be a light to the nations, since it is ultimately Christ who fulfills that mission through him. As a result, God’s intention of revealing his Son “in” Paul (Gal 1:16) reaches its intended goal of God being glorified “in” Paul (Gal 1:24), because Christ lives “in” Paul (Gal 2:20) to fulfill the Servant’s commission to be a light to the nations.257 into the divine nature, but rather that his experience of Christ dwelling in him is mediated by his faith in him. Cp. the salient conclusion of Martyn (Galatians, 258): “The risen Lord extends the space of his power by taking up residence in Paul, the paradigmatic eschatological human being. That event does not fully remove Paul from the space of human beings; but it does create a new sphere in which Paul lives . . . . Having been conformed to Christ’s death (cf. Phil 3:10), Paul continues to share Christ’s path, finding that the event in which the risen Christ has seized him is in fact his being brought to life (cf. Rom 8:1). The dominant motif, then, is not a mystical union with divine nature, but rather the resurrected Christ’s powerful invasion, seen on a personal level.” 257 A natural question at this point is whether this line of thinking applies only to Paul or extends to other believers as well. Within Galatians there are at best only hints that the mission of the Servant is carried out in individual believers (or within the corporate body of believers). In Gal 4:19 Paul speaks of being in labor with the Galatians “until Christ is formed in you [evn u`mi/n].” If in fact the reference to believers being “lights in the world” in Phil 2:15 is an echo of Isa 49:6 (see above, 110-11), we would have additional textual grounds to extend the language beyond Paul to all believers. Further evidence might also be seen in the change Paul makes from the singular euvaggelizo,menoj in Isa 52:7 to the plural euvaggelizo,menwn in Rom 10:15 (see above, 106-8); such an alteration at least indicates an expansion of the prophecy to make explicit the identification of the heralds with Christian preachers (cp. the first person plural pronouns in 2 Cor 2:14-6:10). If one accepts the testimony of Acts 13:47, Paul there identifies the mission of the Servant as commanded to him and Barnabas by the Lord, indicating that the commission applies at least to Paul’s co-workers. The cumulative effect of this evidence is to suggest that Paul did not see his own ministry as the exclusive fulfillment of the continuation of the Servant’s mission, but rather that Christ also lived in others to fulfill the task of being a light to the nations. If then Christ the Servant lives in all believers to complete the mission of being a light to the nations, one may ask whether Paul is in any sense “unique.” Even within Galatians itself Paul seems to characterize his ministry as having a distinct salva-

120


Confirmation for this line of reasoning can be found in at least two other places. First, Paul does not hesitate to claim that Christ speaks “in me” when addressing the Corinthian church. We have already noted above that in 2 Cor 5:20–6:2 Paul claims that Christ is speaking through him, even appropriating God’s words to the Servant in Isa 49:8 and transforming them into God’s words to the Corinthians through Paul now.258 Later in the same letter, Paul hints that some “are seeking proof of the Christ who speaks in me [evn evmoi,]” (2 Cor 13:3). In response to this challenge, Paul calls upon them to test themselves, because “Jesus Christ is in you [evn u`mi/n], unless you are unapproved” (13:5). The very words that Paul speaks are Christ’s words because Christ dwells in him to speak those words. The logic seems to be that since Christ is in Paul speaking to them, if Christ is in them they should recognize Paul’s words as those of Christ himself. Second, and perhaps even more apparent, is Paul’s conviction that his suffering is intimately linked to Christ’s. He writes to the Colossians, “I am filling up what is lacking in the sufferings of Christ in my flesh” (1:24). This notoriously difficult verse has a lengthy history of interpretation,259 but a growing number of scholars are concluding that Paul here draws upon the Jewish apocalyptic notion of the messianic woes.260 Yet the question still remains as to how Paul can claim that his tion-historical role; he refers to James, Cephas and John as pillars whose ministry is “to the circumcised” while his own ministry is “to the Gentiles” (Gal 2:8-10). From this one may infer that Paul regarded his own ministry as having a special place within salvation history without concluding that Paul regarded himself as the only person entrusted with ministry to the Gentiles. Furthermore, the citation of Isa 52:15 in Rom 15:21 suggests that part of Paul’s unique role within salvation history was to be the leading pioneer of the expansion of the gospel among the Gentiles. Finally, one should not forget the progression of the term servant in Isa 40–66 (see above, 70-75). We noted that when the term is introduced in Isa 41:8-9; 42:1-9, it refers to the nation of Israel, but because of Israel’s blindness God must raise up a new Servant, an individual who restores the preserved ones of Jacob and is a light to the nations (Isa 49:1-8) by bearing their sin (Isa 52:13–53:12). The result of this individual Servant’s redemption is the creation of servants (Isa 54:17). If Christ is identified as the individual Servant of Isa 49–53, then his redemption produces servants (the church), among which Paul has a distinct role as the pioneer apostle through whom Christ the Servant spearheads the advance of the gospel among the nations. 258 See above 109-10. 259 For recent treatments, as well as pertinent bibliography, see Hanna Stettler, "An Interpretation of Colossians 1:24 in the Framework of Paul's Mission Theology," in The Mission of the Early Church to Jews and Gentiles (ed. Jostein Ådna and Hans Kvalbein; WUNT 127; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000), 185-208; and Jacob Kremer, "Was an den Bedrängnissen des Christus mangelt: Versuch einer bibeltheologischen Neuinterpretation von Kol 1,24," Bib 82 (2001): 130-46. 260 On this, see especially Richard F. Bauckham, "Colossians 1:24 Again: The Apocalyptic Motif," EvQ 47 (1975): 168-70.

Summary and Conclusions

121

own sufferings in some fashion fill up what is lacking in those of Christ. The answer, in our estimation, is that Paul understands himself as so identified with Christ, that what he suffers in the fulfillment of Christ’s mission Christ himself suffers, because Christ dwells so powerfully in him.261 Although he does not explicitly link this conviction to Isa 49–53 in this context, one should not ignore the thematic parallels that are in fact present. Paul speaks of his appointment as a servant, 262 in accordance with the stewardship given to him by God to “fully carry out the word of God” (1:25) by proclaiming the gospel to the Gentiles (1:27), and it is to this end that Paul labors in the power of Christ who is at work in him (1:29). As a result we are justified in positing that Paul’s identification of himself as the Servant (through whom the ultimate Servant works) who completes the mission of the suffering Servant lies behind Paul’s argument here, even though it remains unexpressed. 263

2.4 Summary and Conclusions Summary and Conclusions In the opening two chapters of Galatians, Paul relies heavily on Isa 49– 53 in explaining his calling as the apostle to the Gentiles. God purposed to reveal his Son in Paul so that the good news about his Son might be proclaimed to the Gentiles. At the moment of that revelation, the old Paul died, and Christ arose in him to such an extent that he was now the animating force in Paul’s life and ministry. Consequently, Christ

261 Here we must distinguish carefully between the redemptive sufferings of Christ (limited to the cross) and the afflictions (qli/yij) that result from the dawn of messianic age. As has been often noted, nowhere is qli/yij used in reference to Christ’s redemptive suffering, and within Colossians itself Paul makes the sufficiency of Christ’s death on the cross clear (1:12-14, 19-22; 2:13-14). Instead, Paul highlights the inescapable connection between the fulfillment of his apostolic ministry and the suffering that fulfillment must entail, a theme that receives emphasis not only in his own writings (1 Cor 4:9-13; 2 Cor 4:4-18; 5:18-6:11; 11:23-33; 12:9-10; Gal 6:17), but in Acts as well (9:16; 20:23; 21:1-14). 262 Admittedly, Paul uses the word dia,konoj (which appears nowhere in the LXX of Isaiah) rather than dou/loj or pai/j, which are both used in the Servant passages. However, the word can have the meaning servant, and that nuance is at least consistent with the larger context here in Col 1:25. 263 See especially, James D. G. Dunn, The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon: A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 116-17. He concludes similarly that Col 1:24 is “the most striking expression of a conviction which Paul seems to have had from the beginning of his apostolic ministry, namely that his mission was to fulfill or complete that of the Servant of Yahweh, that is, also of the suffering Servant of deutero-Isaiah” (116). Cp. Andrew T. Lincoln, “Colossians,” NIB 11:614-15.

122


became a light to the Gentiles through Paul’s proclamation of the gospel, with the result that God was glorified. All of this from Paul’s perspective was in fulfillment of Isa 49–53. Christ’s substitutionary death and subsequent resurrection was the fulfillment of the suffering Servant portrayed in Isa 52:13–53:12, while his commission as apostle to the Gentiles fulfilled the mission of the Servant in Isa 49 to be a light to the nations. These two themes are brought together in Paul’s conviction that Jesus Christ, the suffering (and vindicated) Servant, had now taken up residence in his own life to such a degree that Christ now lives through him to fulfill the mission of the Servant of Isa 49 to be a light to the nations.

Chapter 3

Reading the Servant’s Redemption in Galatians 3–4: Paul’s Interpretation of the Servant’s Salvation in Isaiah 51–54 Reading the Servant’s Redemption

3.1 Overview of the Argument in Galatians 3–4 Overview of the Argument in Galatians 3–4 Paul’s argument in Galatians 3–4 is by all accounts rather intricate, and at several points not entirely clear. 1 The burden of these two chapters is to respond to the false teaching of his opponents in Galatia, who apparently have been advocating the necessity of works of the Law in order for these Gentile Christians to be justified before God. Paul responds by arguing that both the initial reception of the Spirit and the ongoing experience of that same Spirit are not based on works of the Law but rather on hearing with faith. This conclusion rests on Paul’s conviction that the Law is no longer the way in which God’s people relate to God and each other; that epoch in salvation-history has passed with the coming of Christ.

1

Different perspectives on the structure of Gal 3–4 are not difficult to find. Even among those who use rhetorical analysis proposals differ. Betz (Galatians, 19-22) regards 3:1–4:31 as the probatio, whereas R. Longenecker (Galatians, c-cxix) sees 4:11 as the end of the probatio and 4:12 as the beginning of the exhortatio. Witherington (Grace, 25-36), on the other hand, concludes that the probatio stretches from 3:1–6:10. Given that the proponents of rhetorical analysis cannot even agree on the type of rhetoric in Galatians (deliberative or forensic), disagreement on the structure of the epistle is not surprising. Among those unimpressed by rhetorical analysis, a thematic approach is often taken. For example, Fung groups 3:1–5:12 under the heading “Exposition of the Doctrine of Justification by Faith”; see Ronald Y. K. Fung, The Epistle to the Galatians (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 28-32. For a recent discussion of the structure of Galatians, see the essays in Mark D. Nanos, ed., The Galatians Debate: Contemporary Issues in Rhetorical and Historical Interpretation (Peabody: Hendrickson, 2002), 3-154.

124

Reading the Servant’s Redemption

The central character in Gal 3–4 is without question Abraham. 2 To what extent Paul’s opponents based their teaching on their own explanation of the Abraham story cannot be determined with any certainty, though the prominence Paul gives to the Abraham story suggests that his opponents made use of it in some fashion.3 Thus in Gal 3–4 Paul expounds the significance of Abraham within the outworking of God’s plan to redeem Jew and Gentile alike. The result is one of the more challenging Pauline texts, full of landmines for the interpreter nearly 2,000 years removed from the occasion. 2

3

Paul’s use of the Abraham story has received significant attention; see, e.g., the following: Hansen, Abraham in Galatians; Lloyd Gaston, "Abraham and the Righteousness of God," HBT 2 (1980): 39-68; Joseph P. Braswell, "'The Blessing of Abraham' versus 'the Curse of the Law'," WTJ 53 (1991): 73-91; R. A. Harrisville III, The Figure of Abraham in the Epistles of St. Paul: In the Footsteps of Abraham (San Francisco: Mellen Research University Press, 1992); Stephen E. Fowl, "Who Can Read Abraham's Story? Allegory and Interpretive Power in Galatians," JSNT 55 (1994): 77-95; Robert A. Pyne, "The 'Seed,' the Spirit, and the Blessing of Abraham," BSac 152 (1995): 211-22; Jan Lambrecht, "Abraham and His Offspring : A Comparison of Galatians 5,1 with 3,13," Bib 80 (1999): 525-36; William J. Dumbrell, "Abraham and the Abrahamic Covenant in Galatians 3:1-14," in Gospel to the Nations: Perspectives on Paul's Mission (ed. Peter Bolt and Mark Thompson; Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP, 2000), 19-31; Bruce W. Longenecker, "Sharing in Their Spiritual Blessings? The Stories of Israel in Galatians and Romans," in Narrative Dynamics in Paul: A Critical Assessment (ed. Bruce W. Longenecker; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002), 58-84; Morna D. Hooker, "'Heirs of Abraham': The Gentiles' Role in Israel's Story: A Response to Bruce Longenecker," in Narrative Dynamics in Paul: A Critical Assessment (ed. Bruce W. Longenecker; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002), 85-96; Nancy C. Koyzis, Paul, Monotheism and the People of God: The Significance of Abraham Traditions for Early Judaism and Christianity (JSNTSup 273; New York: T&T Clark International, 2004), 85-114. The most forceful claim that Paul’s opponents used the Abraham story comes from Martyn, Theological Issues, 161-75. He contends that Paul’s opponents (whom he calls the Teachers) strongly emphasized redemptive history — “The expression sperma Abraam is important to the Teachers because it refers to the salvific line, the line that began with Abraham, that extended through the generations to the corporate people of Israel, that now has become explicitly messianic in the nomistic gospel of the Jerusalem church, and that is climactically extended to the whole of the world through the Teachers’ own mission to the Gentiles” (164). Now that the Messiah has come “the Gentiles have the opportunity of transferring from their present existence as ethnē/goyim into the redemptive-historical line of the Abrahamic nomistic covenant. By following Abraham in the rite of circumcision, they can enter the already-existent people of God, the sperma Abraam, Israel.” Despite the confidence with which Martyn asserts his reconstruction, one may seriously question whether the epistle provides sufficient evidence for the level of detail Martyn goes on to provide. As Silva has pointedly asked in regard to the validity of any given reconstruction, “could the interpretation of the relevant passages be sustained even if we did not have the theory in question? In other words, do the facts directly accessible to us, such as the literary context and confirmed historical data, provide sufficient support for the interpretation?”; see Moisés Silva, Interpreting Galatians: Explorations in Exegetical Method (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001), 107. For a helpful discussion of the challenges of mirror-reading Galatians, see John Barclay, "Mirror-Reading a Polemical Letter: Galatians as a Test Case," JSNT 31 (1987): 73-93.


125

3.2 Instances of Isaianic Influence Instances of Isaianic Influence Even a cursory glance at Gal 3–4 reveals Paul’s reliance upon the Pentateuch for his argument; 4 he explicitly cites from Gen 15:6 (3:6); Gen 12:3/18:18 (3:8); Deut 27:26/28:58 (3:10); Lev 18:5 (3:12); Deut 21:23 (3:13); Gen 21:9-10 (4:29-30). When the numerous allusions and echoes are added, no one can seriously question that Paul’s argument is shaped by his reading of Torah. But was this not the same Law that Paul’s opponents read in reaching very different conclusions? What then accounts for their radically different readings of the same text? At least part of the answer rests in Paul’s reading of the Law through Isaianic lenses, as we shall see in our discussion below.

3.2.1 Galatians 3:1-5 Within these five verses, Paul asks five questions that challenge the Galatians to reevaluate their flirtation with Law. From these five questions several main themes emerge which Paul will unpack throughout the remainder of the letter: Jesus’ crucifixion, the Spirit, the contrast between (the hearing of) faith and the (works of) Law, and the initiation and continuation of the Christian life.5 Three items warrant at least brief mention regarding possible Isaianic backgrounds: receiving the Spirit, the hearing of faith, and suffering in vain. 4

5

The use of the Pentateuch in Gal 3 provides one of the strongest supports for the contention of Francis Watson (Hermeneutics of Faith, 514-33) that Paul understood the Torah as having a narrative structure that decisively shaped his understanding of justification, the Law, and the gospel. According to Watson, this narrative reading of the Torah is “coordinated with Paul’s Christological proclamation” in Galatians 3 (515). Thus Watson’s conclusion is accurate as far as it goes, but in our estimation it does not go far enough. The missing element from Watson’s analysis of Gal 3 is how Paul’s reading of Isaiah 40–66 has shaped both his Christological proclamation and his reading of the Torah. It was the combination of Paul’s encounter with Christ (cf. Gal 1:15-16) and his reading of Isaiah 40–66 that gave him the necessary lenses to read the Pentateuch as “preaching the gospel beforehand to Abraham” (Gal 3:8). According to Charles Cosgrove (Cross and the Spirit, 38-52), Gal 3:1-14 is “the place for us to begin in Galatians” since it is “the first unit that addresses the Galatian problem with directness and specificity” (38). He goes on to further identify 3:1-5 as central, since it “comprises Paul’s first specific word addressed directly to the Galatian situation. If structural considerations have led us to expect here an open window in the problem at Galatia, the content of 3:1-5 bears out this expectation” (39). But Silva (Interpreting Galatians, 175-76 n. 21) is more accurate in his assessment that while one must not undervalue the importance of 3:1-5, Cosgrove has overstated the importance of 3:1-5 for the situation in Galatia to the neglect of 1:6-7, as well as other texts.

126


The Holy Spirit is mentioned three times in these five verses. Paul refers to the Galatians as receiving the Spirit (3:2) and beginning by/in the Spirit (3:3), then concludes by mentioning God as the one who provides them with the Spirit to work miracles in their midst (3:5). Because Paul speaks at length about the Spirit in 5:16-25, and in doing so draws upon Isa 32:14-20 and 57:15-21, we will defer our discussion of the Spirit until the next chapter.6 The central contrast in Gal 3:2-5 is between “works of the Law [e;rgwn no,mou]” and “hearing of faith [avkoh/j pi,stewj].” Both times these phrases occur they are prefaced by the preposition evx, which in this case is used to indicate the grounds on which the action of the verb takes place.7 In both cases these phrases are used to portray two possible (yet opposite) answers to a Pauline question. The first question (“did you receive the Spirit”) deals with the initial reception of the Spirit, while the second (“does he who provides you with the Spirit . . . do so”) addresses God’s ongoing provision of the Spirit. Given the importance of these questions for understanding Galatians, it is imperative to understand what both avkoh/j pi,stewj and e;rgwn no,mou mean in order to grasp the nature of Paul’s contrast. Yet herein lies the problem, since neither phrase is unambiguous; both permit a diversity of interpretations. Because of its possible roots in Isaiah, we will focus largely on the phrase avkoh/j pi,stewj, and deal with e;rgwn no,mou only as it is pertains to establishing the meaning of the former.8 6 7 8

See below, 210-25. Cf. BDAG (3.e). The meaning of the phrase “works of the Law” continues to be debated. Until recently the phrase was largely understood to refer to doing what the Law requires. James Dunn, however, has argued that the phrase refers more specifically to “identity markers” that distinguished Jews from Gentiles – circumcision, dietary regulations and Sabbath observance; see James D. G. Dunn, "The New Perspective on Paul," BJRL 65 (1983): 95-122; James D. G. Dunn, "Works of the Law and the Curse of the Law (Galatians 3:10-14)," NTS 31 (1985): 523-42; James D. G. Dunn, "Yet Once More 'The Works of the Law': A Response," JSNT 46 (1992): 99-117; James D. G. Dunn, "4QMMT and Galatians," NTS 43 (1997): 147; Theology of Paul, 354-59. Dunn’s provocative thesis has called forth a number of responses, among which see the following: Douglas J. Moo, "Law, Works of the Law, and Legalism in Paul," WTJ 45 (1983): 73-100; Thomas R. Schreiner, "'Works of Law' in Paul," NovT 33 (1991): 217-44; Moisés Silva, "The Law and Christianity: Dunn's New Synthesis," WTJ 53 (1991): 339-53; I. Howard Marshall, "Salvation, Grace and Works in the Later Pauline Corpus," NTS 42 (1996): 339-58; Friedrich Avemarie, "Die Werke des Gesetzes im Spiegel des Jakobusbriefs: A Very Old Perspective on Paul," ZTK 98 (2001): 282-309. Dunn’s eventual clarification that works of the Law includes all that the Law requires is a step in the right direction, but his insistence that in contexts that discuss the relationship between Israel and the nations the focus remains on those identity markers continues to be questionable. Dunn’s strong emphasis on the sociological dimension of the Law (i.e., that it distinguishes between Jew and Gentile and is only rejected by Paul only


127

The difficulty of translating the phrase avkoh/j pi,stewj stems from both lexical and syntactical grounds. From a lexical perspective, both avkoh, and pi,stij have a broad range of meaning; the former can refer to either the act of hearing (active) or the message that is heard (passive), 9 while the latter has an even broader semantic domain stretching from the active sense of faith/trust to the passive sense of that which is believed.10 The following charts display the possible combinations in four broad categories:

ppi,stij (active)

x x

x

x

x

9 10 11 12 13 14

aavkoh, (active) hearing with faith (subjective gen.)11 hearing that comes from/in faith (gen. of source) hearing accompanied by faith (subjective gen.)12 hearing that leads to faith (gen. of product or destination) hearing that is faith (gen. of apposition)13

x

x

aavkoh, (passive) the message that brings forth faith (gen. of product)14 the message which aims at faith (gen. of destination)

insofar as it was appropriated in a nationalistic manner by the Jews) has the effect of diminishing the profoundly vertical dimensions of humanity’s relationship with God; see the helpful critiques of Moo, “Works of the Law,” 90-99; Marshall, “Salvation,” 345-54. Cf. BDAG; Louw-Nida 24.52-53, 57; 32.213. Cf. BDAG; Louw-Nida 31.43, 85, 88, 102, 104; 33.289. Rohde, Galater, 131; Fung, Galatians, 131-32; R. A. Cole, The Letter of Paul to the Galatians: An Introduction and Commentary (rev. ed.; TNTC 9; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989),132; Morland, Rhetoric of Curse, 192-95; Koyzis, Monotheism, 93. Possibly Barclay, Obeying the Truth, 85; Gordon D. Fee, God's Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul (Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson, 1994), 382. Sam K. Williams, "The Hearing of Faith: AKOH PISTEWS in Galatians 3," NTS 35 (1989): 82-93; Witherington, Grace in Galatia, 212-13; Dunn, Galatians, 154-55. David J. Lull, The Spirit in Galatia: Paul's Interpretation of Pneuma as Divine Power (SBLDS 49; Chico, Calif: Scholars Press, 1980), 55-56; Barclay, Obeying the Truth, 85 (though see n. 12 above).

128


ppi,stij (passive)

x x

aavkoh, (active) hearing the message of faith (objective gen.)15 faith in the gospel message (objective gen.)16

x x

aavkoh, (passive) the message of the faith (gen. of apposition)17 proclamation of the message of faith (gen. of apposition)18

A glance at the chart reveals subtle differences even within the same quadrant, stemming from the different ways of understanding the genitive construction (as noted in parentheses after each possibility). Thus, even among those who agree on the active or passive sense of avkoh, and pi,stij, subtle differences of meaning emerge based on the nature of the genitive phrase. The four most common views of the genitive (spanning across the various combination of meanings of avkoh, and pi,stij) are objective, source/origin, apposition, and destination/production. Because of the lexical and syntactical ambiguity, at least three additional factors must be considered: the larger context of Galatians, the weight given to the possible allusion to Isa 53:1, and the close parallel found in Rom 10:16-17. Not surprisingly, disagreement persists as to how the larger context informs the expression evx avkoh/j pi,stewj. All agree that evx avkoh/j pi,stewj is presented as the opposite of evx e;rgwn no,mou with respect to “receiving the Spirit,” but the nature of the contrast is disputed. Most consider the contrast to be between two different human actions: observing the Law or hearing the gospel with faith. 19 Others, however, insist that the contrast is not between two different human actions, but rather between the human act of observing the Law 15 16

17 18 19

Bruce, Galatians, 149; LéGasse, Galates, 209-10; Cosgrove, Cross and the Spirit, 48; Susan Elliott, Cutting Too Close for Comfort: Paul's Letter to the Galatians in its Anatolian Cultic Context (JSNTSup 248; New York: T & T Clark International, 2003), 352. Scot McKnight, Galatians: From Biblical Text to Contemporary Life (NIVAC; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 140; R. Longenecker, Galatians, 102-3; B. Longenecker, Triumph, 154; Vincent M. Smiles, The Gospel and the Law in Galatia: Paul's Response to Jewish-Christian Separatism and the Threat of Galatian Apostasy (Collegeville, Minn: Liturgical Press, 1998), 53. Frank J. Matera, Galatians (SP 9; Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1992), 112; William N. Wilder, Echoes of the Exodus Narrative in the Context and Background of Galatians 5:18 (Studies in Biblical Literature 23; New York: Peter Lang, 2001), 102. Schlier, Galaterbrief, 121-22; Betz, Galatians, 132; Hays, Faith, 124-32; Martyn, Galatians, 286-89. See, e.g., Lull, Spirit in Galatia, 55-56; ; Barclay, Obeying the Truth, 85-86 n. 24; Morland, Rhetoric of Curse, 192-95; Fee, God’s Empowering Presence, 380-89; Silva, Interpreting Galatians, 175-76.


129

and the divine act of God in Christ as proclaimed in the gospel message.20 Such a conclusion appears to stem from a desire to eliminate any contingency upon human action for God’s giving of the Spirit or working miracles; the problem, as Williams has pointed out, is that Hays’s assertion that avkoh, means “proclamation” still involves a human contingency, namely the human activity of proclaiming the gospel. 21 Appeals to the context to solve the puzzle of avkoh/j pi,stewj thus fail to achieve consensus. The possibility of an allusion to Isa 53:1 in the phrase has not gone unnoticed, though its significance remains largely ignored. 22 Isaiah 53:1 (MT)

1

Wnte_['muv.li !ymiÞa/h, ymiî ymiî-l[; hw"ßhy> [;Arïz>W `ht'l'(g>nI

Isaiah 53:1 (LXX)23 ku,rie ti,j evpi,steusen th/| avkoh/| h`mw/n kai. o` braci,wn kuri,ou ti,ni avpekalu,fqh

Galatians 3:2, 5 3:2 tou/to mo,non qe,lw maqei/n avfV u`mw/n\ evx e;rgwn no,mou to. pneu/ma evla,bete h' evx avkoh/j pi,stewjÈ 3:5 o` ou=n evpicorhgw/n u`mi/n to. pneu/ma kai. evnergw/n duna,meij evn u`mi/n( evx e;rgwn no,mou h' evx avkoh/j pi,stewjÈ

20

21 22

23

See especially Hays (Faith, 129-31) and Martyn (Galatians, 288-89). Both argue from their larger understanding of Galatians, at the heart of which is a contrast between human action (expressed in observance of the Law) and divine action in Christ. For Hays, the contrast boils down to that between human action and the faithfulness of Christ to the Father in his self-sacrificial death. In a similar vein, Martyn sees a dichotomy between any human action (including, but not limited to works of the law) as a means of participating in God’s saving activity and the divine act of God in Christ. The difference between the two centers on the extent of continuity between the divine act of God in Christ and God’s previous dealings with Israel. Hays sees significant continuity, arguing that Christ is presented as the culmination of God’s promises. By contrast, Martyn sees sharp discontinuity, claiming that God’s act in Christ was his invasion of the cosmos, the decisive inbreaking of the new age. Williams, “Hearing,” 86-7. Those who recognize the allusion include: Bruce, Galatians, 149; Hays, Faith, 128-31; Williams, “Hearing,” 84-85; Silva, Interpreting Galatians, 163. So far as we have been able to determine, there is no evidence of Isa 53:1 being used within the Second Temple period. The LXX follows the MT with the exception of inserting ku,rie at the beginning of the verse.

130


The combination of avkoh, and pi,stij appears nowhere in the LXX, but in Isa 53:1 the verb pisteu,w does appear with the noun avkoh,, the only place in the LXX where the two occur together. The presence of allusions to Isa 53 in Gal 1:4, 16 and 2:20, as well as in 3:13 below, add to the probability of an allusion also in 3:2, 5.24 In Isa 53:1 the prophet asks the question “who has believed our report [Wnte_['muv.li !ymiÞa/h, ymiî / ti,j evpi,steusen th/| avkoh/| h`mw/n]?” a reference to Isaiah’s announcement of the Servant. 25 Thus avkoh, is the object of the verb pisteu,w, and clearly avkoh, has the sense “that which is heard.” Paul argues in Gal 3:2, 5, however, that reception of the Spirit is evx avkoh/j pi,stewj. In contrast to Isa 53:1 we have avkoh, as the head noun of a prepositional phrase that is modified by the noun pi,stij. In the NT there are 104 occurrences of the construction evk + genitive noun + genitive noun with no more than a single word between evk and the first genitive noun or between the first genitive noun and the second.26 In only sixteen of the 104 can the preposition evk possibly mean “on the basis of, because of” (John 1:13 [2x]; Rom 3:20; 2 Cor 13:4 [2x]; Gal 2:16 [4x]; 3:2 [2x], 5 [2x], 22; Rev 16:21; 18:3). 27 Of these sixteen, no clear pattern of the use of the genitive emerges.28 Thus the syntax and broader usage of the construction are not decisive in determining the meaning of evx avkoh/j pi,stewj. At this point the allusion to Isa 53:1 sheds light on at least one aspect of the phrase. If evx avkoh/j pi,stewj is dependent upon the construction pisteu,w + avkoh, in Isa 53:1, then pi,stij should be understood in the active sense of believe/trust. But what about avkoh,? Clearly in Isa 53:1 avkoh, has the passive sense of “that which is heard”; must we conclude the same meaning here in Gal 3:2, 5? In this case, we believe the answer is no; instead avkoh, has the active sense of “hearing.” Why then insist 24 25 26

27 28

On Gal 1:4, 16; 2:20, see above, 55-66, 80-86, 101-2; on 3:13, see below, 142-46. For further discussion of who is speaking in Isa 53:1, see above, 57-58; for discussion of the larger context of Isa 53:1, see above, 57-58. In order to approximate the construction here in Gal 3:2, 5 as closely as possible, the following were excluded: (1) constructions where a substantival adjective occurred instead of a noun (e.g. Rom 1:4); (2) places where because of parallelism the preposition evk was elided but clearly implied (e.g. fulh/j Beniami,n following evk spe,rmatoj VAbraa,m in Rom 11:1); (3) occurrences where a kai, (e.g. 1 Tim 1:5), another preposition (e.g. Heb 5:7), or another non-genitive case noun (e.g. Acts 8:39) came between the two genitive nouns. Of the 104, twenty-six are found in the Pauline corpus: Rom 1:3; 3:20, 26; 4:16; 7:24; 11:1; 1 Cor 9:7; 2 Cor 13:4 (2x); Gal 1:15; 2:16 (4x); 3:2 (2x), 5 (2x), 10, 13, 22; Phil 3:5; 4:22; Col 1:13; 2 Tim 2:8; 4:17. As this listing shows, twelve of the twenty-six are in Galatians. The vast majority of the 104 indicate the more common uses of evk indicating origin or separation. Our own breakdown (excluding evx avkoh/j pi,stewj in Gal 3:2, 5) is as follows: objective (Rom 3:20; Gal 2:16 [4x]; 3:2, 5, 22), attributive (John 1:13 [2x]), material (Rev 16:21), and attributed (Rev 18:3).


131

that pi,stij should be understood in the active sense of believe/trust in light of its dependence upon Isa 53:1 and yet at the same time argue that avkoh, has the active sense in distinction from the clearly passive sense in Isa 53:1? The answer lies in the citation of Isa 53:1 in Rom 10:16.29 In Rom 10:14-17 Paul speaks of the chain of events necessary for a person to “call upon the name of the Lord” and be saved (Rom 10:9-13). He works backwards chronologically, beginning with calling on the name of the Lord and ending with the sending of heralds. In the midst of this chain Paul exclaims in Rom 10:16, “Lord, who has believed [evpi,steusen] our report [th/| avkoh/| h`mw/n],” a clear citation of Isa 53:1. Here avkoh, has the passive sense and is the object of pisteu,w. But in the very next verse (Rom 10:17) Paul uses avkoh, in the active sense to refer to hearing the word about Christ (r`h,matoj Cristou/),30 which in the context is equated with the gospel announced in Isa 52:7 (cp. Rom 10:15).31 This conclusion is further substantiated by comparing 10:17 with 10:14.

29

30

31

For discussion of Isa 53:1 in Rom 10:16-17, in addition to the commentaries, see Hofius, Paulusstudien, 12-13; D. Gewalt, "Die 'fides ex auditu' und die Taubstummen: Zur Auslegungsgeschichte von Gal. 3, 2 und Röm. 10, 14-17," LB 58 (1986): 45-64; Williams, “Hearing,” 84-85; Richard H. Bell, Provoked to Jealousy: The Origin and Purpose of the Jealousy Motif in Romans 9-11 (WUNT 63; Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1994), 89-92; O. Betz, “Jesus and Isaiah 53,” 70-87; Wilk, Bedeutung, 182-84, 254-57, 360, 391; Wagner, Heralds, 178-80, 332-36. On the shift to the active sense of avkoh, cf. Williams, “Hearing,” 84-85; Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 665-66 n. 27. Others contend that avkoh, retains the passive sense; see, e.g., Hans J. Eckstein, "'Nahe ist dir das Wort': Exegetische Erwägungen zu Röm 10:8," ZNW 79 (1988): 204-20. Neither the larger context (note the link between avkoh, here and avkou,w in 10:14, 18) nor the distinction between avkoh, and r`hm/ a in 10:17 support the passive sense; cf. Moo, Romans, 666 n. 27. So also Williams, “Hearing,” 84-85; J. Ross Wagner, "The Heralds of Isaiah and the Mission of Paul," in Jesus and the Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins (ed. W. H. Bellinger and William R. Farmer; Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity Press, 1998), 193-222, esp. 209; cp. the conclusion of Hofius (Paulusstudien, 13) — “Aus der Zusammenschau der — christologisch gedeuteten — Texte Jes 52,13–53,12 und Jes 52,6-10 ergab sich somit für Paulus, daß Gottes Heilshandeln beides umfaßt: das Kreuzesgeschehen als die den universalen »Frieden« schaffende Tat und die Kreuzesverkündigung als das den »Frieden« weltweit proklamierende Wort.” Munck argues against this equation by arguing for a subjective understanding of the genitive phrase r`h,matoj Cristou/; see Johannes Munck, Christ and Israel: An Interpretation of Romans 9–11 (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1967), 94-95. But the use of r`hm/ a in 10:8 is clearly linked to the message about Christ, making a subjective understanding in 10:17 unlikely.

132


Romans 10:14 Pw/j ou=n evpikale,swntai eivj o]n ouvk evpi,steusanÈ pw/j de. pisteu,swsin ououvk h;kousanÈ pw/j de. avkou,swsin cwri.j khru,ssontojÈ

Romans 10:17 a;ra h` pi,stij evx avkoh/j( h` de. avkoh. dia. r`h,matoj Cristou/

Thus in Rom 10:16-17 faith comes through the agency of hearing (avkoh,) the word about Christ, which is none other than the gospel message proclaimed by Paul. If then Paul is able to quote Isa 53:1 in Rom 10:16 and keep the active sense of pi,stij while clearly transforming the passive sense of avkoh, into its active meaning, there is solid reason to see a similar dynamic in Gal 3:2, 5. Based then on our analysis of an allusion to Isa 53:1 in Gal 3:2, 5 and the citation of Isa 53:1 in Rom 10:16-17, we conclude that the best way to render evx avkoh/j pi,stewj in Gal 3:2, 5 is “on the basis of hearing accompanied by faith.” Paul has transformed Isaiah’s question into an affirmation of the proper way to respond to God’s self-revelation in Christ. As we will see below, this transformation signals a reliance upon Isa 51–54 throughout Gal 3–4. Before closing this section we should at least mention the possible reference to “suffering in vain” (evpa,qete eivkh/|) found in 3:4,32 which if legitimate might recall the reference to Paul’s concern in 2:2 that his ministry not be in vain (eivj keno,n). But in addition to the lack of correspondence between the vocabulary, we must ask whether in this context translating the verb pa,scw “suffer” is best. Admittedly, in the NT pa,scw predominantly means to suffer, as it does also in the LXX. The problem with such a meaning in Gal 3:4 is the surrounding context of 3:1-5, which focuses on the Galatians’ experience of the Spirit as proof of the superiority of avkoh, pi,stewj over e;rga no,mou. When added to the fact that a “neutral” meaning of pa,scw (“to experience”) is well attested in secular literature,33 we conclude it is best to render pa,scw in Gal 3:4

32

33

Cosgrove (Cross and the Spirit, 185-87) argues that simply by believing the gospel message believers are drawn “into a sphere of conflict, where sharing the sufferings of Christ is the rule and the power and joy of the Spirit sustain those under assault” (185), thus making a reference to suffering appropriate. He then attempts to connect Gal 3:4 to 4:12-20, 29; 6:11-18 to contend that through their experience of the Spirit the Galatians have participated in Christ’s sufferings. See examples given in LSJM and BDAG.


133

as “experience.”34 As a result, any possibility of an echo back to Gal 2:2 and Isa 49:4 can be safely eliminated.

3.2.2 Galatians 3:6-29 In order to demonstrate that both the initial reception and ongoing experience of the Spirit are based on hearing with faith and not works of the Law, Paul calls the patriarch Abraham as his chief witness. 35 From 34

35

For a similar conclusion, see especially Fee, God’s Empowering Presence, 386-87. Although Fee overstates when he claims that there is “not the slightest hint” that “the churches of Galatia were undergoing suffering” (387) — note 4:29 — the remainder of his argument is on the mark. Discussion of Abraham within the Second Temple period was extensive; all that can be done here is to briefly note the three primary emphases regarding Abraham in the literature. First, mention is frequently made of Abraham being reckoned righteous because of his faithfulness under testing. First Maccabees 2:52 is a clear example — “Was not Abraham found to be faithful in testing and it was reckoned to him as righteousness?”; cp. also Sir 44:19-21; Jub. 17:17-18; T. Levi 9:1-14; T. Benj. 10:4. The growth of this tradition eventually resulted in enumerating ten specific trials, though these lists often differed with respect to the specific tests, the exception being that the binding of Isaac (Gen 22) was always considered the tenth one (see, e.g., Exod. Rab. 44:4). By way of contrast, perhaps the most germane parallel to Paul’s engagement with Jewish traditions regarding Abraham is found in Jubilees, where the author also identifies one key text in the Abraham narrative that shapes the understanding of the whole. Instead of Gen 15:6, however, the author of Jubilees selects Gen 22:1ff. The result is a reading that emphasizes Abraham’s faithful response to God’s testing, even in places where the Genesis narrative does not appear to stress it. For an excellent comparative analysis of Paul’s argument in Gal 3–4 and that in Jubilees 11-23, see Watson, Hermeneutics of Faith, 222-36. The second emphasis fell upon the need to connect God’s declaration of Abraham’s righteousness in Gen 15:6 with his acceptance of circumcision in Gen 17:4-14. Such a tradition is reflected in Lev. Rab. 2:10, which argues that Abraham fulfilled the Torah in advance of its giving at Sinai, resulting in his righteous status. For a concise treatment of these first two strands of the Abraham tradition in Second Temple Judaism, see R. Longenecker, Galatians 110-12; cf. also Hansen, Abraham in Galatians, 167-99 and Watson, Hermeneutics of Faith, 231. The third emphasis focuses on the significance of Abraham as one who rejected idolatry to worship the true God. This theme is seen most visibly in the Apocalypse of Abraham, Jubilees and Philo, De Abrahamo. As such he functioned as a model for all converts to the true God; for discussion, see Koyzis Monotheism, 1-84, and Watson, Hermeneutics of Faith, 253-57. Finally, note should be made of Philo’s attention to the importance of Gen 15:6 in the Abraham narrative, found in Abr. 262 — “There is also another praise of him [Abraham] recorded in his honor and testified to in the holy scriptures, which Moses has written, in which it is related of him that he believed in God; which is a statement brief indeed in words, but of great magnitude and importance to be confirmed in fact.” But Philo’s emphasis on Gen 15:6 is quite different from that of Paul, as Watson (Hermeneutics of Faith, 252) helpfully summarizes — “Philo finds in Genesis 15.6 a general statement about Abraham’s entire life. . . . But Paul claims that Genesis 15.6 speaks only of a single defining moment in Abraham’s life. . . . In opposition to all

134


3:6, Abraham dominates the discussion until Gal 5:2, where Paul then builds on his Abrahamic foundation to discuss freedom in the Spirit. 36 Paul’s use of the OT in this section of Galatians has received abundant attention, with special emphasis given to his citations from Genesis, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy in 3:6-13.37 Largely neglected, however, has been the formative role that Paul’s reading of Isaiah has played in his use of the Abraham story. Therefore our task in this section will be to highlight the points of contact with Isaiah, setting the stage for our synthesis later in the chapter. Regardless of the precise nuance of the Kaqw,j that begins 3:6,38 there is no doubt that Paul intends his citation of Gen 15:6 to introduce his argument that the reception and ongoing experience of the Spirit is on the basis of hearing with faith and not works of the Law. The conclusion (a;ra) Paul draws from Gen 15:6 is that determining who the “sons [uiòi,] of Abraham” are must be on the basis of faith (evk pi,stewj).39 The underlying logic would appear to be that those who believe as Abraham did receive the same response from God: 40 they are justified. But this conclusion does not get Paul far enough, for he must still connect the Gentiles to Abraham and the status of righteousness. The next step

36 37

38

39

40

eloquent eulogizing of his virtues, Abraham is understood as an unremarkable figure, who becomes remarkable only as the object of a divine promise that insistently reshapes his life by setting it in the light of the world’s eschatological future.” The possible exception to this characterization might be Gal 4:8-20, where Paul makes a personal appeal to the Galatians, though even that is informed by themes introduced in his treatment of the Abraham story. See, e.g., Hansen, Abraham in Galatians, 112-39; Dunn, “Curse of the Law,” 523-42; Schreiner, Law and Its Fulfillment, 44-63; Wright, Climax of the Covenant, 137-74; Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture, 234-48; Martyn, Theological Issues, 161-90; Wakefield, Where to Live, 131-87; Stanley, Arguing with Scripture, 121-30; Basil S. Davis, Christ as Devotio: The Argument of Galatians 3:1-14 (Lanham, Md: University Press of America, 2002), 46-81. The adverb kaqw,j could be comparative (as BDAG concludes here), part of an abbreviated introductory formula (though usually with ge,graptai), or used to introduce an exemplum. The difference between the three for the meaning of Gal 3:6 is relatively insignificant; all are agreed that Paul uses it to introduce a scriptural citation and that the scriptural citation in some fashion sheds light on Paul’s argument for the supremacy of evx avkoh/j pi,stewj; for further discussion see Koch, Schrift als Zeuge, 106 and Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture, 234-35. We have rendered uiòi, as “sons” rather than the more inclusive “children” or “descendants” in order to make clearer the connection between this initial phase of Paul’s argument and the concluding section where he discusses the two “sons” of Abraham (4:22). Paul appears to be using the common Semitic idiom whereby a person is referred to as a son of someone or something to indicate that the person shares that characteristic to significant degree; cf. discussion and examples in BDAG under uiò,j 3.c.a.


135

(Gal 3:8) is thus to go back to God’s original promise to Abram, found in a conflation of Gen 12:3 and 18:18. 41 The promise of blessing to all the nations proves fundamental to Paul’s argument throughout Gal 3–4, but we must not miss the significance of how Paul introduces this promise. First, he asserts that Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles on the basis of faith (evk pi,stewj). Paul thus brings together the concepts of faith, justify/righteousness, and blessing to the Gentiles by merging God’s declaration of righteousness in Gen 15:6 with God’s promise of blessing to the Gentiles in Gen 12:3/18:18. Second, Paul claims that the promise of Gen 12:3/18:18 was in fact an advance proclamation of the gospel (proeuaggeli,zomai) to Abraham. As such, readers of Genesis can foresee Paul’s gospel within the Abraham story, if only they have eyes to see. All that remains is for Paul to explicitly link those who are evk pi,stewj with the faith of Abraham, a move which he makes in 3:9 to conclude his thesis statement (3:6-9). Identification as a son of Abraham depends on neither ethnicity nor works of the Law (even circumcision), but rather on believing as Abraham believed.42 41

42

The reason for the conflation likely stems from the fact that in the LXX of Gen 12:3, the clause Paul quotes reads evneuloghqh,sontai evn soi. pa/sai ai` fulai. th/j gh/j instead of evneuloghqh,sontai evn auvtw/| pa,nta ta. e;qnh th/j gh/j (18:18). Paul deemed it important for his argument to have explicit mention of the noun e;qnoj. The genitive phrase th/j gh/j was likely omitted because it was considered redundant or alternatively to prevent the possibility that it would cloud Paul’s intention to emphasize the applicability to individual Gentiles rather than nations as a collective. On the issues surrounding the translation of these texts and the relationship between them, see John Ellington, "Translating God's Promises to Abraham," BT 45 (1994): 201-07. For discussion of the conflation of Gen 12:3 and 18:18 in Gal 3:8, see Hays, Faith, 173-77. With respect to the Jewish traditions related to blessing for the nations flowing in large part from Gen 12:3/18:18, see now Jeffrey R. Wisdom, Blessing for the Nations and the Curse of the Law: Paul's Citation of Genesis and Deuteronomy in Gal 3.8-10 (WUNT 133; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001), 65-86. He identifies three strands to the promise: land, multiplication of descendants, and blessing to all the families of the earth. After tracing this third strand through the Second Temple period, Wisdom summarizes the evidence as follows — “The third strand thus is understood as a blessing which the nations will share with Israel because the nations come into contact with and are influenced by the righteous behavior of Jews. This blessing will further be the result of the fact Jews and gentiles live in the same communities and that the nations will also benefit from the prosperity experienced by righteous Jews” (86). Although this third strand is found widely in the Second Temple literature, Wisdom notes that it is absent in both the Qumran literature and Josephus. The only place in the LXX where the adjective pisto,j refers to Abraham is Neh 9:7-8 — “you found his [i.e., Abraham] heart faithful [pisth,n] and established with him a covenant.” Here, however, given the context, it seems better to render the phrase su.n tw/| pistw/| VAbraa,m “with believing Abraham.” The point, then, is that the faith of the believer is analogous to that of Abraham; cf. similarly, R. Longenecker, Galatians 11516. By contrast, Hays (Faith, 173-74) argues that Paul presents Abraham’s faith as somehow representative in nature, meaning that “the Gentiles are blessed not on the

136


But on what grounds does Paul merge the concepts of faith, justification/righteousness, blessing to the Gentiles, and an advance announcement of the gospel?43 The answer lies within Isa 51–54, and the retelling of the Abraham story found there.44 We must begin with a look at Isa 51:1-8, where the prophet explicitly mentions Abraham and then trace how Isaiah develops the Abraham tradition in the following chapters. Within the larger context of Isa 49–55, Isa 51:1-8 occupies something of a transitional position.45 On the one hand it follows the third servant song (50:4-9) and the summons to respond to the Servant or face judgment (50:10-11). In that respect it functions as a description of those who respond rightly to the Servant. 46 At the same time, however, Isa

43

44

45

46

analogy of Abraham, but ‘in’ him” (174). But the emphasis in the larger context is on Christ as the representative figure, not Abraham. In other words, Paul is not arguing that Gentiles are blessed by being in Abraham, but rather in Christ. Abraham’s faith is not credited to the Gentiles for righteousness. Scott (Paul and the Nations, 129-30) suggests that the combination of Gen 12:3 and 18:18 comes to Paul through the lenses of Ps 71:17 LXX (MT=72:17), where the Abrahamic promise is combined with a messianic hope; see similarly Pyne, “Seed,” 213. While not denying the possibility that Ps 71:17 LXX may have influenced Paul’s argumentation here, our discussion will demonstrate far more connections to Isa 51:18. For the contention that Paul found these themes interwoven in Genesis itself (largely) without any intervening textual lenses, see Wisdom, Blessing, 139-53 and similarly Watson, Hermeneutics of Faith, 185-93. On the use of the Abraham tradition in Isaiah, see, e.g., the following: N. A. van Uchelen, "Abraham als Felsen (Jes 51:1)," ZAW 80 (1968): 183-91; Gwilym H. Jones, "Abraham and Cyrus : Type and Anti-Type?," VT 22 (1972): 304-19; E. John Hamlin, "The Joshua Tradition Reinterpreted," South East Asia Journal of Theology 23 (1982): 103-08; J. Gerald Janzen, "Rivers in the Desert of Abraham and Sarah and Zion (Isaiah 51:1-3)," Hebrew Annual Review: Hebrew Annual Review 10 (1986): 139-51; Edgar W. Conrad, "Isaiah and the Abraham Connection," AJT 2 (1988): 382-93; Bernard Gosse, "Les traditions sur Abraham et sur le jardin d'Éden en rapport avec Is 51,2-3 et avec le livre d'Ëzéchiel," in Studies in the Book of Genesis (ed. André Wénin; BETL 155; Leuven: University Press, 2001), 421-27; Rikki E. Watts, "Echoes from the Past: Israel's Ancient Traditions and the Destiny of the Nations in Isaiah 40-55," JSOT 28 (2004): 481-508. Although scholars have largely agreed on the coherence of 51:1-8 as a unit, they have failed to agree upon whether Isa 51:1-8 belongs with what precedes or follows it. Among those who group it with the preceding context (with varying degrees of certainty) are Melugin, (Formation, 155), Koole (Isaiah III, 2:134-37), Oswalt (Isaiah 40–66, 333), Korpel and de Moor (Structure, 447-89; they regard the macro-unit as 50:1– 51:8), and Blenkinsopp (Isaiah 40–55, 325-28). Among those who group Isa 51:1-8 with what follows are Motyer (Prophecy, 402-3) and Childs (Isaiah, 396-401; he sees the larger unit as 51:1–52:12). Here we may also note that in his layout of the macrostructure of Isa 40–53, Laato (Servant of YHWH, 12-13) regards Isa 51:1-3 as the center of a cycle that runs from 48:20–52:12, labeling it “the rebuilding of Jerusalem.” For discussion of who is being addressed in Isa 51:1-8, see Hyun C. P. Kim, Ambiguity, Tension, and Multiplicity in Deutero-Isaiah (SBL 52; New York: Peter Lang, 2003), 177-86. Laato (Servant of YHWH, 129) notes that although the word servant does not occur in Isa 51:4-8, “the passage contains many terminological parallels to other ser-


137

51:1-8 also looks forward to the call for the arm of Yahweh to awake and perform the promised new exodus in 51:9-16. Despite the disagreement over the place of Isa 51:1-8 within the larger context, scholars are relatively united in their assessment that Isa 51:1-8 can be divided into three sections.47 Verses 1-3 point back to God’s past dealings with Abraham and link the fulfillment of Yahweh’s promise to him with the restoration of Zion (cast in terms of a new Eden, which ties into the larger theme of new creation). In 51:4-6, Yahweh announces the nearness of his saving righteousness to not only Israel but the coastlands as well. The pericope then closes in 51:7-8 with a call for God’s people not to fear their opponents but rather trust in the revelation of Yahweh’s saving righteousness. Having established this framework, we can now proceed with our analysis of the relevant details of the text for our comparison with Gal 3:6-9. Isaiah 51:1 opens with a summons for all who pursue righteousness (qda;w> / evplh,quna) him. In an analogous fashion, although Israel’s situation in exile is bleak, Yahweh promises to bring her comfort, a comfort that is described in terms of a new Eden (51:3). In Isa 51:4, another summons goes forth to listen to the prophetic oracle; however, it is addressed not merely to Israel, but to the kings (oi` basilei/j) of the earth as well.52 The reason they are to listen is that a law ' .miW / h` (hr"At / no,moj) will go forth from Yahweh, and his justice ( yjiêPv Þ ; rAaðl. / eivj fw/j evqnw/n).53 Yahkri,sij mou) as a light to the nations (~yMi[ weh’s law and justice are then linked to his righteousness ( yqid>ci / dikaiosu,nh) and the light of his salvation ( y[iêv.yI / fw/j to. swth,rio,n mou),54 which are near (51:5). The result is that nations ( ~yYIåai / e;qnh) will hope in Yahweh and his arm. The final three verses (51:6-8) reassure the hearers of the eternal nature of Yahweh’s righteousness and salvation. 55 Heaven and earth may pass away, but not Yahweh’s righteousness and salvation; they remain forever. Several points of contact between Gal 3:6-9 and Isa 51:1-8 may be observed. First, righteousness is a key element in both passages; in Isa 51:1-8 dik- words occur four times, while in Gal 3:6-9 they appear twice. These parallels are further enhanced when one remembers the high concentration of dik- words in 2:14-21, which introduces Paul’s discussion of justification/righteousness throughout Gal 3–4. Second, although Isa 51:1-8 does not explicitly mention faith, a call for the audience to believe in Yahweh’s promise is clearly implied. They are called several times to listen or pay attention (51:1, 4, 7), and the intended result is belief that Yahweh will fulfill his promises just as he did for

51 52

53

54 55

nings of the people of God — i.e., one individual (Abraham). But it was from this seemingly impossible situation that God brought blessing through Sarah and fulfilled his promise of offspring. So too, despite the miniscule nature of the remnant, God promises to fulfill his promise of blessing and provide descendants. No equivalent for this verb is present in the MT. The MT reads yMiÞWal.W (“and my people/nation”), a reading that Aquila, Symmachus (both read fulon mou) and Theodotian (genoj mou) all appear to have attempted to restore. However, if the text of Sinaiticus is original (oi` basilei/j), we may have evidence of an expansion of this oracle to explicitly address the Gentiles. Cp. the similar statements in the Servant Songs in 42:1, 4, 6; 49:6 and the discussion of the links in Childs, Isaiah, 402-3. In his analysis of the Abraham tradition in Isa 4055, Hamlin (“Joshua,” 105) rightly notes that the servant plays a key role in the fulfillment of Abraham being a blessing to the nations; see discussion below, 155-58. There is no equivalent in the MT for the word fw/j in the LXX. On the textual difficulties in Isa 51:6, see Howard Jacobson, "A Note on Isaiah 51:6.," JBL 114 (1995): 291 and H. G. M. Williamson, "Gnats, Glosses and Eternity: Isaiah 51:6 Reconsidered," in New Heaven and New Earth: Prophecy and the Millennium: Essays in Honor of Anthony Gelston (ed. P. J. Harlan and C. T. R. Hayward; VTSup 77; Leiden: Brill, 199), 101-11. Our argument is not affected by one’s conclusion on the matter.


139

Abraham.56 Third, both Isaiah and Paul summon the people to look back to Abraham as a means of encouraging present trust in God’s faithfulness to his promises. Isaiah’s audience is exhorted to look back at God’s faithfulness in blessing and multiplying Abraham despite his circumstances, and in doing so trust Yahweh to fulfill his promises of bringing his righteousness/salvation near. Paul points his readers back to God’s justification of Abraham on the basis of faith and the promise of blessing to all the nations to persuade the Galatians that all who share Abraham’s faith also share his status as righteous. Finally, both Isaiah and Paul include the Gentiles within the scope of God’s saving righteousness.57 In Isaiah 51:1-8 the Gentiles are not only directly addressed by this prophetic oracle, but are told of a day when they will wait for and hope in the saving righteousness of Yahweh. Paul argues that such a day is now, and that all who share the faith of Abraham share in the promise made to him, regardless of their ethnicity.58 An additional piece of evidence may be drawn in from Paul’s use of the verb proeuaggeli,zomai in Gal 3:8. In the previous chapter, we noted the Isaianic background of Paul’s use of the euvaggel- word group, and argued that this Isaianic context has decisively shaped Paul’s understanding of the Christ event and the formation of the church. 59 The key text for that Isaianic background is Isa 52:7-10, where the herald announces the “gospel” of Israel’s restoration as demonstration of Yahweh’s reign, resulting in all the ends of the earth seeing Yahweh’s salvation.60 When one recalls that Israel’s restoration was linked to the 56 57

58

59 60

So also Melugin, Formation, 158. Cp. the conclusion of Watts (“Echoes,” 495) — “It is possible that the movement from Abraham and Sarah to offspring (v. 2), to restoration of the land (v. 3), and then to justice for the nations (vv. 4-5) is intended not only to invoke the tradition reflected in Gen. 12.1-3 but also its progression: Abram leaves Ur/Haran (Gen. 12.1; Isa. 40– 55 just happens to be about an exodus from the same general location), is promised that he will become a great nation and be blessed (v. 2a), and finally is declared to be a blessing for all peoples on the earth (vv. 2b-3).” An additional connection between Isa 51:1-8 and Gal 3:6-9 is that Isa 51:6 may also be drawing upon Gen 15:5-6. H. Kim (Ambiguity, 199-200) sees in Isa 51:6 a “metaphorical allusion” to Gen 15:5-6. He rests this conclusion upon the fact that just as Abraham is directed to look to the heavens (hm'ym > ;ªV'h; an"å-jB,h; / avna,bleyon dh. eivj to.n ouvrano.n) in Gen 15:5, so too God’s people are exhorted in Isa 51:6 to lift their eyes to heaven (~k,øynEy[e( ~yIm;’V'l; •Waf. / a;rate eivj to.n ouvrano.n tou.j ovfqalmou.j u`mw/n). In both cases the command to look to heaven is rooted in God’s assurances to his people that he will fulfill his promise to multiply Abraham’s descendants. Is it possible that Paul may have noticed a similar connection in his own reading of Isaiah 51:1-8 and reflected such an understanding here in Gal 3:6-9? See discussion above, 67-70. At least four strong connections between Isa 51:1-8 and 52:7-10 may be observed: (1) the promise to comfort Zion and her waste places (51:3; 52:9); (2) the promise of salvation (51:5, 6, 8; 52:7); (3) mention of the arm of Yahweh to accomplish salvation be-

140


blessing and multiplication of Abraham in Isa 51:1-8, we see that the “gospel” in Isa 51–54 is related to the Abrahamic blessing, the revelation of God’s righteousness, the summons to faith, and the inclusion of the Gentiles.61 It seems at least plausible that Paul’s assertion that the gospel was proclaimed beforehand to Abraham is not so much de novo as de lectio, prompted by his reading of Isa 51–54. Thus, although there are few explicit verbal points of connection, our comparison of Isa 51:1-8 and Gal 3:6-9 has revealed significant similarities at the thematic and theological level. The cumulative effect of these contact points suggests that in combining the concepts of faith, justification/righteousness, blessing to the Gentiles, advance proclamation of the gospel, and the promise to Abraham, Paul is alluding to Isa 51:1-8. As a result, Paul’s initial thesis statement of the Abraham story given in Gal 3:6-9 has been shaped not only by his engagement with Genesis 15–17, but also by his reading of Isaiah 51:1-8.62 Therefore, if the thesis statement of Paul’s argument in Gal 3:1–5:1 has been shaped by Isa 51:1-8, and the necessary condition for experiencing the Spirit (“hearing with faith”) has been influenced by Isa 53:1, we should be alert to the possibility that the remainder of Gal 3–4 reveals points where portions of Isa 51–54 have informed Paul’s presentation of the Abraham story. As we shall see, there are several more points where this Isaianic framework may be observed. In Gal 3:10-14, Paul states the first corollary of the thesis presented in 3:6-9 — those who rely upon works of the Law are under a curse (grounded in a citation of Deut 27:26), and thus justification cannot come from works of the Law.63 Instead, the righteous will live by faith

61 62

63

fore the nations (51:5; 52:10); (4) the promise of joy/happiness (51:3; 52:7, 9). Although these connections are observed individually by various scholars, only Motyer (Prophecy, 419-20) makes any significant link between Isa 51:1-8 and 52:7-10. Although not the focus of his investigation, Steck does make some of these connections as well; see Odil Hannes Steck, "Zions Tröstung: Beobachtungen und Fragen zu Jesaja 51,1-11," in Hebräische Bibel und ihre zweifache Nachgeschichte: Festschrift für Rolf Rendtorff zum 65 (ed. Blum von Erhard, Christian Macholz, and Edward W. Stegemann; Neukirchen-Vluyn : Neukirchener, 1990, 1990), 257-76. On the relationship of the nations to Yahweh and Israel in Isa 40–55, see Odendaal, Eschatological, 171-95; Andrew Wilson, The Nations in Deutero-Isaiah: A Study on Composition and Structure (Lewiston, N.Y: E. Mellen Press, 1986). That Gal 3:6-9 functions as a thesis statement for the remainder of Gal 3–4 has been noted before; see, e.g., Gerhard Ebeling, trans. David Green, The Truth of the Gospel: An Exposition of Galations (; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985), 163-65; Dunn, Galatians, 159; Hays, “Galatians,” 254-55. Debate continues to swirl as to why those who are evx e;rgwn no,mou are under a curse. Many scholars argued that the reason for the curse resting upon those who are evx e;rgwn no,mou is that they fail to perfectly obey the Law; see, e.g., Moo, “Works of the Law,” 94-97; Thomas R. Schreiner, "Paul and Perfect Obedience to the Law: An Eval-


141

(taken from Hab 2:4). The problem with the Law, then, is that it is not “of faith [evk pi,stewj],” a claim substantiated by quoting Lev 18:5.64 Christ redeemed “us”65 from the curse of the Law by becoming a curse for “us,” an assertion grounded by citing Deut 21:23.66 The purpose of

64 65

66

uation of the View of E. P. Sanders," WTJ 47 (1985): 245-78; idem, Law and Its Fulfillment, 44-63; B. Longenecker, Triumph, 135-41; Kim, New Perspective, 136-41; Andrew Das, Paul, the Law, and the Covenant (Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson, 2001), 148-55; Westerholm, Perspectives, 375 n.66. Perhaps the most common alternative proposed is that the curse spoken of here is that which rests on the nation of Israel because she remains in exile; see, e.g., Wright, Climax of the Covenant, 137-56; James M. Scott, “‘For as Many as are of Works of the Law are under a Curse’ (Galatians 3:10),” in Paul and the Scriptures of Israel, 187-221; Frank Thielman, Paul and the Law: A Contextual Approach (Downers Grove, Ill: IVP, 1994), 126-29; Scott J. Hafemann, "Paul and the Exile of Israel in Galatians 3–4," in Exile: Old Testament, Jewish, and Christian Conceptions (ed. James M. Scott; JSJSup 56; New York: Brill, 1997), 329-71; Watson, Hermeneutics of Faith, 431-34. But in response to this corporate emphasis, Das (Paul, 15455) has persuasively shown that whatever corporate dimensions may be present in Gal 3:10-14, Paul’s application of the curse of the Law applies “to any individual (or group) who would hope to enter into a right relationship with God through the law” (154). Therefore our analysis proceeds with the understanding that the reason those who are evx e;rgwn no,mou are under a curse is because they fail to do “all that is written in the book of the Law” (Gal 3:10; citing Deut 27:26). On the wording of the citation of Deut 27:26 (and the probable conflation with 28:58), see Stanley, Paul and the Language of Scripture, 238-43. For a detailed examination of Leviticus 18:5 in Galatians 3:12, see Sprinkle, Law and Life, 131-64. Scholars remain divided as to who the “us (h`ma/j)” refers to in Gal 3:13. Those who regard h`ma/j as inclusive understand the point to be that Christ has redeemed believers, both Jew and Gentile, from the curse of the Law; see, e.g., Bruce, Galatians, 16667; Hansen, Abraham in Galatians, 122-23; Morland, Rhetoric of Curse, 215-26, esp. 22223 n. 141; Eckstein, Verheissung, 152; Norman H. Young, "Who's Cursed — and Why? (Galatians 3:10-14)," JBL 117 (1998): 79-92; Wisdom, Blessing for the Nations, 190-95; Westerholm, Perspectives, 414-17. Others argue for an exclusive understanding, meaning that the curse refers to the Jews (often nuanced in different ways to be sure); see, e.g., Wright, Climax of the Covenant, 151-53; Terence L. Donaldson, "The 'Curse of the Law' and the Inclusion of the Gentiles: Galatians 3.13-14," NTS 32 (1986): 94-112; Ardel Caneday, "`Redeemed From the Curse of the Law': The Use of Deut 21:22-23 in Gal 3:13," TJ 10 (1989): 185-209; In-Gyu Hong, The Law in Galatians (JSNTSup 81; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1993), 78-79; Fee, God’s Empowering Presence, 392-93. Each view has its difficulties. On the inclusive view one must explain in what sense Gentiles were under the curse of the Law as well as the significance of the citation of Deut 21:23. Advocates of the exclusive reference must account for the seeming parallel between the h`ma/j of 3:13 and la,bwmen in 3:14 as well as the seeming implication that Paul would be speaking of exclusively Jewish reception of the Spirit in 3:14. The parallel between the h`ma/j of 3:13 and la,bwmen in 3:14 strongly suggests to us that Paul has in view an inclusive reference to believers in both places — Christ redeemed Christians (Jew and Gentile alike) from the curse of the Law so that Christians (Jew and Gentile alike) might receive the promise of the Spirit. On the role that Deut 21:23 plays in the passage, see below 145; on how Gentiles could be thought to be subject to the curse of the Law, see below 190 n. 205. The asyndeton here in Gal 3:13 is all the more noticeable when one considers that every other verse in this paragraph has some sort of connective introducing it; R.

142


Christ becoming a curse was to enact the blessing of Abraham to the Gentiles, by which here Paul means the reception of the Spirit.67 Within this remarkably dense paragraph, the depiction of Christ’s death as a substitutionary curse-bearing clearly stands out,68 and it is our contention that this claim has its roots in Paul’s reading of Isa 53. Four lines of evidence can be adduced. First, we have already observed that Paul has alluded to Isa 53 twice previously in Gal 1:4 and 2:20. The former appears to have been an early traditional fragment that Paul has expanded interpretively to encapsulate his gospel message. In 2:20 Paul has taken the Christological formula and personalized it by replacing the reference to sins with a personal pronoun. Given that Paul has expressed an understanding of Christ’s death in the language of Isa 53 twice already, another echo here in Gal 3:13 must be judged as at least possible. The plausibility of such an echo is enhanced by a comparison of Gal 1:4 and 3:13. Christ 1:4

3:13

kuri,ou VIhsou/ Cristou/ (from 1:3) Cristo,j

Redemptive action

Object

Realm

evxe,lhtai

h`ma/j

evk tou/ aivw/noj tou/ evnestw/toj ponhrou/

evxhgo,rasen

h`ma/j

evk th/j kata,raj tou/ no,mou

From this table we can see the parallel nature of the thought between the first clause of 3:13 and the second clause of 1:4. Both have Christ as the subject of a redemptive verb with the same object, and include a “realm” (expressed with evk + genitive) out of which Christ has re-

67

68

Longenecker (Galatians, 121) suggests that it “lends rhetorical force to the change of subject” from the Law to Christ. Thus we consider the two i[na clauses in Gal 3:14 to be coordinate rather than the second being subordinate to the first, though the second does specify the content of the first; cp. the conclusion of Fee (God’s Empowering Presence, 393 n. 94) – “the shift from ‘Gentiles’ to ‘us’ in the second clause seems to exclude the other grammatical option that the second clause is dependent on the first.” Although the background of Deut 27–30 is widely recognized in Gal 3:10-14, significant disagreement remains as to how Deut 27–30 should shape our understanding of Gal 3:10-14. For an excellent discussion of both the corporate and individual ramifications of the Deut 27–30 background, as well as extensive interaction with opposing viewpoints, see Das, Paul, 148-55.

143


deemed the object (“us”).69 And although Paul does not explicitly connect the curse of the Law with the present evil age, his association of Torah with the “elementals” (stoicei/a; Gal 4:8-10)70 strongly suggests that the Law and its curse are identified in Paul’s mind with the present evil age and certainly not the age of the Spirit that Christ has inaugurated. But an even further parallel can be seen by comparing the rest of Gal 1:4 and 3:13. Christ 1:4 3:13

kuri,ou VIhsou/ Cristou/ (from 1:3) Cristo,j

Reflexive action do,ntoj eàuto,n geno,menoj . . . kata,ra

Beneficiary u`pe.r tw/n a`martiw/n h`mw/n u`pe.r h`mw/n

Here we can see that the first clause of 1:4 and the second clause of 3:13 also have strong parallels to each other. Both examples have Christ as the subject of a verb that describes a reflexive action with a “beneficiary” expressed in a clause with u`pe,r + the genitive. The parallel nature of these statements within the same letter encourages interpreting them in light of each other. Thus Christ becoming a curse for “us” can be understood as explaining how Christ gave himself for “us.” In his selfsacrificial death Christ became a curse for all who would be identified with him by faith. Second, the parallels between Paul’s use of the Abraham story in Galatians 3 and Romans 4 have long been noted, though the differences should not be glossed over.71 While we must allow for the possibility of development in Paul’s use of the Abraham story between the writing of the two letters, we should also note that Romans 4 concludes with a 69

70

71

Other examples of this pattern are found in 1 Thess 1:10 and perhaps 2 Tim 3:11 (depending on whether o` ku,rioj refers to Christ or God the Father). Similar to these examples are places where God is the subject of the verb: Col 1:13; 1 Thess 1:10. On the parallel in Gal 4:4, see below, 164-66. Paul uses a similar construction to speak of God delivering him from dangers in 2 Cor 1:10 as well. Debate continues to swirl concerning the meaning of stoicei/a; for an excellent discussion of the various views with significant bibliography, see Clinton E. Arnold, "Returning to the Domain of the Powers: Stoicheia as Evil Spirits in Galatians 4:3, 9," NovT 38 (1996): 55-76. Since nothing in our argument depends on a specific view, we have chosen to render stoicei/a as “elementals” and leave undecided the precise nuance. See, e.g., Franz Mussner, "Gesetz — Abraham — Israel," Kairos 25 (1983): 200-22; Harrisville, Figure of Abraham, 5-30; Witherington, Paul’s Narrative Thought World, 4050; B. Longenecker, “Sharing,” 72-82.

144


statement about Jesus that is now widely regarded as an allusion to Isa 53.72 Given that Paul saw fit to end his discussion of Abraham in Rom 4 with a strong allusion to Isa 53 (albeit loosely connected to the larger context), we should not dismiss the possibility that his description of Christ’s death here also has its roots in Isa 53.73 The third argument for seeing Isa 53 behind Gal 3:13 can be found within Isa 53 itself. The woeful condition in which Israel finds itself is exile, experiencing the curses of the Law promised in Deut 27–29 to her if she abandons Yahweh.74 In addition to the abundance of new exodus themes throughout Isa 40–55, there are specific linguistic connections as well. Space permits listing only the most significant. In Isa 53:4 the Servant is said to bear the sicknesses (‘WnyE’l'x\) of the people, sicknesses which were promised to come upon the people when they disobeyed Yahweh (Deut 28:58-61). Yahweh promises to strike (hk'äK.y:) Israel with various afflictions (Deut 28:22, 27, 28, 35); the Servant is described as struck (hKeîmu) by God. Whereas Israel is threatened with being scattered to the ends of the earth (#r,añ,) in Deut 28:64; 29:26-27 (Eng. 29:27-28), the Servant is cut off from the land (#r,añ,) of the living (Isa 53:8). Deuteronomy 29:15, 19 equate curse with death, which is what the Servant experiences (Isa 53:8-9). The vicarious suffering of the Servant brings blessing to his seed ([r;z)ò< , thus reversing the curse placed on Israel and her seed (Deut 28:46, 59) and echoing the promise of restoration of Israel and her seed (Deut 30:6). Finally, in the song of Moses, Yahweh promises to have compassion on his servants, avenge their blood, and atone for the 72

73 74

See, e.g., Walther Zimmerli and Joachim Jeremias, The Servant of God (Rev. ed; SBT 20; London: SCM Press, 1965), 79-87; Peter Stuhlmacher, Reconciliation, Law, and Righteousness: Essays in Biblical Theology (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986), 55-56; Hooker, “Use,” 101-3; Otfried Hofius, "The Fourth Servant Song in the New Testament Letters," in The Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 in Jewish and Christian Sources (ed. Bernd Janowski and Peter Stuhlmacher; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 163-88, esp. 180-82. This possibility is further enhanced by the parallels between Rom 4:24-25 and Gal 1:1-4. Both speak of the “handing over” of Christ for our sins/transgressions and connect that to his resurrection, using the language of Isa 53. For a similar contention, see Anthony R. Ceresko, "The Rhetorical Strategy of the Fourth Servant Song (Isaiah 52:13-53:12): Poetry and the Exodus-New Exodus," CBQ 56 (1994): 42-55, esp. 47-50; Hugenberger, “Servant,” 129-39; Rikki E. Watts, "Jesus’ Death, Isaiah 53, and Mark 10:45: A Crux Revisited," in Jesus and the Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 and Christian Origins (ed. W. H. Bellinger and William R. Farmer; Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity Press, 1998), 125-51, esp. 142. Although he does not draw connections between the specific sufferings of the Servant and Deut 28–30, Clements (“Isaiah 53,” 39-54) does link the vicarious suffering of the Servant to restoration from exile. None of these scholars, however, develop the specific connections listed below. That Isa 53 presents the Servant as suffering the punishment of Israel’s sin does not necessitate an exclusive understanding of h`ma/j in Gal 3:13; for discussion see below, 190-91.


145

land (Deut 32:36, 43); the Isaianic Servant is the one who accomplishes the comforting of his people, is vindicated, and bears the sin of many (Isa 53:4-5, 10-12).75 Given these connections, it does not seem farfetched to conclude that Paul noted them as well.76 The fact that Paul conflates Deut 27:26 and 28:58 in Gal 3:10 further suggests he has made this connection. Lastly, there is evidence in the early church of seeing a link between Deut 21:23 and Isa 53. In his Dialogue with Trypho, Justin Martyr alludes to these two texts in connection with one another. 77 Justin presents Trypho as objecting to Jesus as the Christ because he was crucified, meaning that he was accursed (Dial. 89.1-2); Justin responds by first alluding to the prediction of Christ’s suffering in Isa 53 (Dial. 89.3) and then later arguing that Christ took upon himself the curse of the Law in his sufferings on the cross (Dial. 95.1-2). Of course, one might object that Justin wrote nearly a century after Paul, and thus dismiss this line of evidence. However, serious consideration must be given to the possibility that Deut 21:23 was used by Jews in the earliest days of the Christian movement as evidence that Jesus was not the Messiah. 78 If so, the solution found in Isa 53 as offered by Justin Martyr may have its roots within the earliest period of the church, and may even be presupposed in Gal 3:10-14. These four lines of evidence converge to make it plausible, and in our estimation probable, that in Gal 3:13 Paul is alluding to Isa 53.79 75 76 77

78

79

Several scholars have noted connections between the song of Moses and Isa 32 as well; see now Thomas A. Keiser, "The Song of Moses: A Basis for Isaiah's Prophecy," VT 55 (2005): 486-500, and the bibliography there. Cp. the observation of Ceresko (“Rhetorical Strategy,” 50) that Isa 53 “describes the Servant bearing in his own person the effect of these [i.e. Deut 28:59-61] curses.” For discussion of Deut 21:23 and Isa 53 in Justin’s Dialogue, see Willem Cornelius van Unnik, "Der Fluch der Gekreuzigten: Deuteronomium 21,23 in der Deutung Justinus des Märtyrers," in Theologia Crucis — Signum Crucis: Festschrift fúr Erich Dinkler zum 70. Geburtstag (ed. Carl Andersen and Günter Klein; Tübingen: Mohr (Siebeck), 1979), 483-99 and esp. Daniel P. Bailey, "'Our Suffering and Crucified Messiah' (Dial. 111.2): Justin Martyr's Allusions to Isaiah 53 in His Dialogue with Trypho with Special Reference to the New Edition of M. Marcovich," in The Suffering Servant: Isaiah 53 in Jewish and Christian Sources (ed. Bernd Janowski and Peter Stuhlmacher; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 324-417, esp. 389-99 and 402-6. See Peter Stuhlmacher, Biblische Theologie des Neuen Testaments (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1992-1999), 1:156. According to Stuhlmacher, the NT (Acts 5:30; 10:39; 13:29; Gal 3:13) gives evidence that applying Deut 21:23 to Jesus’ crucifixion has Jewish roots, as evidenced by documents from Qumran that apply Deut 21:23 to the crucifixion of reprobate Jews. He goes on to claim that Paul held this conviction before his conversion (1:246-47). A possible fifth line of evidence would be the argument that o` di,kaioj in Gal 3:11 (citing Hab 2:4) is a Messianic title meant to refer to Jesus; see T. W. Manson, "The Argument from Prophecy," JBL 46 (1945): 129-36; Dodd, According to the Scriptures,

146


Admittedly the verbal connections between Gal 3:13 and any part of Isa 53 are not as strong as those found in Gal 1:4 or 2:20. However, the clear parallels between Gal 1:4 and 3:13 are sufficient to establish the influence of Isa 53 on Gal 3:13. But Paul is not finished drawing upon Isaiah in this paragraph; the two-fold purpose clause found in Gal 3:14 also has its roots in Isaiah as well. Scholars have long observed that in connecting the gift of the Spirit to the promise to Abraham Paul makes a link that is absent in Genesis.80 Nowhere in Gen 12–25 is the Spirit even mentioned, let alone related to God’s covenant with Abraham. Yet Paul insists that the gift of the Spirit is intricately connected to the promise to Abraham. From where does Paul draw such an idea? Paul may have been led to such a conclusion from his reading of Isa 44:3-5.81

80 81

49-51; Hanson, Studies in Paul’s Technique, 42-45; Hays, Faith, xxxvii,134-38; Richard B. Hays, "'The Righteous One' as Eschatological Deliverer: Hermeneutics at the Turn of the Ages," in Apocalyptic and the New Testament: Essays in Honor of J. Louis Martyn (ed. Joel Marcus and Marion L. Soards; JSNTSup 24; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1989), 191-215; Douglas A. Campbell, "The Meaning of pi,stij and no,moj in Paul: A Linguistic and Structural Perspective," JBL 111 (1992): 91; Douglas A. Campbell, "Romans 1:17 — A Crux Interpretum for the pi,stij cristou/ Debate," JBL 113 (1994): 265. In doing so, both Hays and Campbell cite places where Jesus is referred to as “the righteous one,” and in some of these passages allusions to Isa 53 are present (Acts 3:13-18; 22:14-15; 1 Peter 3:17-18). Referring to Isa 53:10-12 in his discussion of Gal 3:16, Hays argues that although the LXX does not identify spe,rma (53:10) with di,kaion (53:11), “anyone approaching this text with Paul’s presupposition that the sp,erma is the Messiah could very easily read the passage that way” (Faith, 137). Further strengthening this possibility is that in Isa 53:12 the righteous one is said to inherit (klhronomh,sei) many, which comports well with the argument in Gal 3:16 that Christ as the seed inherits the promises. Hays then concludes “Paul does not, of course, quote from Isaiah 53 in Galatians 3, but it seems likely that he is drawing upon a traditional association of messianic themes (Righteous One, seed, inheritance) for which Isaiah 53 is one source among others” (ibid., 137-38). But despite the possible support it offers for our argument here, we conclude along with Watson (Hermeneutics of Faith, 51-57) that a christological reference is unlikely. Typical is Barclay (Obeying the Truth, 88) — “Despite his considerable ingenuity in adapting the Genesis text to his purposes, even Paul could not find a text which connected Abraham with a central aspect of Christian identity — the Spirit.” Although a few scholars (Mussner, Galaterbrief, 235; Dunn, Galatians, 179-80; LéGasse, Galates, 237; Martyn, Galatians, 323) have noted a possible parallel, only Hays (Faith, 182-83; “Galatians,” 261) has attempted any argumentation. As far as we have been able to determine, no references are made to Isa 44:3-5 in the extant Second Temple literature. There are a few passing references in the rabbinic materials, but none of them deal with the Spirit.

147


Isaiah 44:3-5 MT

‘~yIm;-’ qC'a, yKiÛ 3 ~yliÞz>nOw> ameêc'-l[; ‘yxiWr qCoÜa, hv'_B'y:-l[; ytiÞk'r>biW ^[,êr>z:-l[; Wxßm.c'w> 4 `^ya,(c'a/c,-l[; ~ybiÞr"[]K; ryci_x' !ybeäB. hzx;B. rvz:w> / to. spe,rma sou e;qnh klhronomh,sei]” (54:3).103 Thus in Isaiah 40–55, the themes of Servant and seed are merged in such a way to suggest both corporate and individual aspects. We have already argued that Paul employs Servant language in Gal 1–2 to speak of Christ’s identity and his own apostolic calling. Here is Galatians 3 we

99

100

101 102 103

says in Honor of Marvin Pope (ed. John H. Marks and Robert M. Good; Guilford, Conn: Four Quarters, 1987), 101-04; and Peter Höffken, "Abraham und Gott, oder: Wer liebt hier wen? Anmerkungen zu Jes 41,8," BN (2000): 17-22. The servant in Isa 41:8 is almost certainly a corporate and not individual reference. Goldingay (“Abraham’s Offspring,” 39) makes the interesting observation that Abraham is the first person in the OT to be referred to by God as “my Servant [yDI(b.[;]” in Gen 26:24, where Yahweh is speaking to Isaac. On the connections between Isa 41:8 and the description of the Servant in Isa 42:1-4, see Ekblad, Isaiah’s Servant Poems, 36, 58, 62; Koole, Isaiah III, 1:214-15; Childs, Isaiah, 325. Despite noting that the Abrahamic tradition and royal ideology are merged in Isa 41:8-13, Laato (Servant of YHWH, 74-77) fails to carry this observation forward into his discussion of Isa 42:1-9. However, he does helpfully note the connection between the use of the Abraham tradition here in Isa 41:8-9 and that found in Isa 51:2 (ibid., 74). Cp. the measured conclusion of Childs (Isaiah, 325) — “For anyone who takes the larger literary context seriously, there can be no avoiding the obvious implication that in some way Israel is the servant who is named in 42:1.” For a similar conclusion with argumentation and interaction with other views, see Watts, “Consolation,” 49-56. Others who connect the seed of Isa 53:10 with Abraham include Hamlin, “Joshua,” 105, and Watts, “Echoes,” 495. For discussion of whether the seed mentioned in Isa 53:10 includes Gentiles, see Wilson, Nations, 301-15.

154


have already proposed an allusion to Isa 53:1 in 3:2, 5 as well as an allusion to Isa 53 in Paul’s statement about Christ’s death in 3:13. It would seem then at least plausible that Paul recognized the conjunction of the Servant and seed of Abraham themes in Isa 41:8; if so, the move from Christ as the Servant of Yahweh to Christ as THE seed of Abraham is not difficult to fathom. Especially significant in this regard are the references in Isa 53:10 to the Servant seeing his seed and that seed inheriting the nations in 54:3. This convergence of themes fits the argument of Galatians 3 quite well. Two additional considerations from the larger context of Isa 41:8 and Gal 3:16 bolster the connection between the two texts. We noted above how the language of Isa 41:8 is appropriated in the description of the Servant in 42:1. One of the distinguishing characteristics of the Servant is that Yahweh has placed his Spirit upon Him. Crucial to Paul’s argument in Galatians 3 is that the Galatians have experienced the Spirit as the fulfillment of the Abrahamic promise (Gal 3:2, 5, 14). Second, the larger context of Isa 41:8 is strongly monotheistic.104 Yahweh is the one who accomplishes his will, the first and the last, the I am (41:4, 26-29). Monotheistic convictions emerge forcefully at least twice in Gal 3–4 as well: God is one (3:20-21) and is contrasted with the weak and worthless elementals (4:8-10). These lines of evidence converge to make it plausible that Paul has drawn his conception of Christ as the singular seed of Abraham from the cues he finds introduced in Isa 41:8 and traced through to their climax in Isa 53–54. The coherence between the development of the “seed” theme in Isa 41–54 and that in Gal 3:16-18 establishes the possibility of a thematic parallel, and this conclusion is strengthened by the fact that this “seed” theme is merged with the Servant theme in Isaiah in a way analogous to that found in Galatians. Whether one could move beyond this to asserting a collective echo of Isa 41:8; 53:10; 54:3 is questionable, though not beyond the realm of possibility. Our argument for Isa 41:8; 53:10; 54:3 as a background to Paul’s understanding of Christ as the singular seed does not necessarily exclude other streams of thought from contributing to Paul’s exegesis of “seed”; they may in

104 For the contention that in Isa 40–55 monotheism rather than henotheism is in view, see Bernhard Lang, Der einzige Gott: Die Geburt des biblischen Monotheismus (Munich: Kösel, 1981), 84-113; John Day, Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan (JSOTSup 265; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 2000), 228-29. For discussion of the evidence supporting the normativity of monotheism rather than henotheism in Israel, see Jeffrey H. Tigay, You Shall have no Other Gods: Israelite Religion in the Light of Hebrew Inscriptions (HSS 31; Atlanta, Ga: Scholars Press, 1986).


155

fact be present.105 We are asserting, however, that Paul has drawn on the connection made between the seed and the Servant in Isa 40–55, and in doing so has transformed the Abraham narrative of Gen 12–25 from supporting evidence for his opponents’ contention for circumcision into further testimony for his contention that relating to God and one another is now Christ and faith focused rather than Law and performance oriented. As for the convergence of the key themes of covenant (diaqh,kh), promise (evpaggeli,a), seed (spe,rma), and inheritance (klhronomi,a) in Gal 3:15-18, on one level they spring from the Abraham story in Genesis. In our discussion of “seed” above we argued that Gen 17:7-12 was the key place from the Abraham narrative in which Paul may have observed an interplay between the singularity and plurality of seed. Yet strikingly, the specific language of inheritance is absent from Gen 17; there are no occurrences of the klhronom- word family in the LXX or of the root vry in the MT.106 True, Gen 17:8 does refer to the land being given to Abraham’s seed as “an everlasting possession,” but instead of the more common root vry in the MT or the klhronom- word family in the LXX we find hZ"xua] and kata,scesij, both rare in the Abraham narrative. 107 By contrast, vry / klhronom- factor prominently in Gen 15.108 In fact, the central question is who will be Abram’s heir. Abram believes Yahweh’s promise that one coming from Abram’s own body would be his heir (15:4) and in some measure fulfill the promise of seed more numerous than the stars in the sky (15:5); as a result Yahweh counts him righteous (15:6). In response to Abram’s question “how will I know that I will inherit it [i.e., the land]” Yahweh responds by making a covenant (tyrIB. / diaqh,kh) with Abram (15:18). Thus in Genesis 15 the notions of inheritance, covenant, faith, and righteousness are all tightly connected. But Genesis 15 is not the only place where the themes of covenant, seed, and inheritance merge; there are nine additional places where diaqh,kh, spe,rma and klhronomi,a occur within a meaningful literary unit.109 105 For other suggestions on the background of Paul’s exegesis here, see above, n. 94. 106 The root vry is consistently rendered by the klhronom- word family in the LXX; 61% of the occurrences of vry where there is an equivalent in the LXX are translated by the klhronom- word family, with no other single term reaching 13%. 107 The root hZ"xua] occurs elsewhere in Gen 12–25 only in 23:4, 9, 20 where it means “burial site”; recognizing this difference in meaning the LXX renders hZ"xua] with kth/sij instead. 108 For a helpful discussion of the similarities and differences in Gen 15 and 17, see Paul R. Williamson, Abraham, Israel and the Nations: The Patriarchal Promise and Its Covenantal Development in Genesis (JSOTSup 315; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 2000), 26-120. 109 Num 18:19-20; Deut 4:25-40; 10:1-22; 1 Chr 16:8-22; Neh 9:8-15; Ps 24:13-14 (Eng = 25:13-14); 104:1-15 (Eng = 105:1-15); Isa 54:1-10; 61:1-11. Other than Gal 3:15-18, Acts

156


Of these nine occurrences, two can be safely eliminated as potential links,110 leaving seven possibilities. Five (Deut 4:25-40; 1 Chr 16:8-22; Ps 104:1-15; Isa 54:1-10; 61:1-11) of these eight also have the noun e;qnoj nearby in the context, but only two had the potential to be interpreted by Paul in a manner consistent with his argument for full and equal inclusion of the Gentiles within the people of God: Isa 54:1-10 and Isa 61:1-11.111 Isaiah 54:1-17 is an oracle celebrating the salvation accomplished by the Servant in 52:13–53:12 by drawing together several key themes from Isa 40–53.112 Verses 1-3 are a summons to rejoice in the Servant’s finished work and respond appropriately. The barren woman is called to rejoice because her sons (ynEB>) / te,kna) will be more numerous (~yBiór: / polla. . . . ma/llon) than those of the married woman (54:1). 113 Therefore she must enlarge her tent to make room for these sons (54:2). The reason is given in 54:3 — she will spread out, and her seed will inherit the nations (vr"êyyI ~yIåAG ‘%[er>z:w> / kai. to. spe,rma sou e;qnh klhronomh,sei).114 In Isa 54:4-10, the prophet reassures the formerly barren woman that although she has experienced the anger of Yahweh her husband, now she will receive his compassion. This section closes with Yahweh’s assurance that his covenant of peace (‘ymiAlv. tyrIÜb.W / h` diaqh,kh th/j eivrh,nhj) will never be shaken (54:10).

110 111 112

113 114

7:2-53 is the only other NT occurrence of these words within a meaningful literary unit. Here we may also note that in Sir 44:19-21 these three themes do converge in the author’s eulogy of Abraham. But in stark contrast to Paul, Sir 44:19-21 roots the making of God’s covenant with Abraham in the fact that Abraham “kept the Law of the Most High” (44:20). Furthermore, there is no hint of the interplay between a singular and plural notion of “seed” present within Sir 44:19-21; the references to seed are clearly understood in the plural sense. Numbers 18:19-20 refers to the apportionment provided to the Levites, whereas in Deut 10:1-22 the only occurrence of diaqh,kh appears in the phrase “ark of the covenant.” Negatively e;qnoj refers to the nations that Yahweh drove out of the land in Deut 4:2540, whereas a neutral use is seen in 1 Chr 16:8-22 = Ps 104:1-15. Cp. Westermann, Isaiah 40–66, 270; Patricia T. Willey, Remember the Former Things: The Recollection of Previous Texts in Second Isaiah (SBLDS 161; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997), 232-33; Koole, Isaiah III, 2:347. Because we will deal with Isa 54:1-10 again at Gal 4:27 and 6:16, our discussion here will focus on the points of contact with Gal 3:15-18. For further discussion of Isa 54, including the use of Isa 54 within extant Second Temple texts, see below, 173-85. Motyer (Prophecy, 445) connects the “many (more) sons of the barren” in 54:1 with the “many” of 52:14-15; 53:11-12. Blenkinsopp (Isaiah 40–55, 360) notes that Isa 54:117 is anticipated as far back as 49:14-26. In noting the connection between the references to seed in 53:10 and 54:3 Motyer (Prophecy, 445) astutely observes that “we see [in 54:1-5] the results of the Servant’s work taking shape before our very eyes.” Given that the barren woman of Isa 54:1-3 is clearly linked to barren Sarah in 51:2, we should also see the seed of 54:3 as specifically Abrahamic seed.


157

Thus in these ten verses we find the notions of seed, inheritance, nations, and covenant brought together to describe the state of salvation brought about by the Servant. Several additional connections between Isa 54:1-10 with various portions of Isa 49–53 may also be seen. The two verbs (!nr / euvfrai,nw and xcp / r`h,gnumi) that summon the barren woman to rejoice in 54:1 are both found in 49:13 and 52:9 in response to the announcement of Yahweh’s impending salvation. The barren woman motif has already been mentioned in 49:20-21 and alluded to in 51:1-2. The “many” (br; / polla,) are mentioned five times (52:14, 15; 53:11, 12 [2x]) in 52:13–53:12;115 particularly striking are the references to the Servant justifying the many (53:11) and bearing the sins of the many (53:12). Especially important for our discussion here is mention of the seed inheriting the nations.116 We have already argued above that Paul may have merged the ideas of seed and Servant based on Isa 41:8; here we observe that in 53:10 the Servant sees his seed as a result of offering himself as a guilt offering. Perhaps Paul made the connection between the Servant seeing his seed and the promise that the seed will inherit the nations, and in doing so saw a latent promise of Gentile inclusion in the people of God.117 With regard to the “covenant of peace” mentioned in Isa 54:10, it must be remembered that in Isa 49:8 Yahweh promises to make the Servant “a covenant for the people [~['ê tyrIåb.li ‘^n>T,a,w> / e;dwka, se eivj diaqh,khn evqnw/n].” One of the purposes of making the Servant a covenant for the peoples is “to inherit the inheritance of the desolate [ tAm)mevo tAlïx'n> lyxiÞn>h;l. / klhronomh/sai klhronomi,an evrh,mou].” Within the larger context of Isa 49–54 the covenant of peace referenced in 54:10 is the realization of the Servant becoming a covenant for the peoples, including Gentiles.118 115 Koole (Isaiah III, 2:352) regards this observation as one of the strongest pieces of evidence for a close link between Isa 52:13–53:12 and 54:1ff. 116 The exact force of the Hebrew clause vr"êyyI ~yIåAG ‘%[er>z:w> is disputed. The construction vr;y" with a form of yAG as its object can mean to drive out the nations, a meaning attested in places such as Exod 34:24; Deut 4:38; 9:1; Josh 23:13. In the context of Isa 54:3, however, it makes better sense to understand the MT in the way that the LXX clearly understood the Hebrew and conclude that the nations are being included within the restoration described in 54:1-10; see Edward J. Young, The Book of Isaiah (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972), 3:362-63; Knight, Servant Theology, 182; Koole, Isaiah III, 2:356-57. For a dissenting opinion, see Oswalt, Isaiah 40–66, 417-18 n. 30; Blenkinsopp, Isaiah 40–55, 362. 117 This reading may be further supported by a similar line of thought in Isa 49:17-22. There the bereaved woman sees her children returned to her by the nations, who stream to Yahweh. Given the other parallels between Isa 49:14-23 and 54:1-10, this interpretation should not be dismissed lightly. 118 Cp. similarly Koole (Isaiah III, 2:346), who links the reference to a covenant of peace with the Servant’s commission to be a covenant for the people (42:6; 49:8), a peace

158


Thus we see that in Isa 54:1-10 the seed inherits the nations because of the redemption accomplished by the Servant, bringing about a covenant of peace that results in God’s people experiencing his lovingkindness and compassion. Although the connection between the Servant and the seed is not explicitly spelled out in Isa 53–54, we have already observed a close relationship between seed and Servant in Isa 41:8, and the use of the term in 53:10 and 54:3 in close proximity further suggests a link. In Gal 3 we find a similar association between the Servant and the seed united in Paul’s presentation of Christ. As the Servant he is the one who redeems his people (3:13), and as the seed he inherits the blessing promised to Abraham (3:16, 18). As the true heir of the Abrahamic promise, Christ then shares his inheritance with all who are united to him by faith, regardless of ethnicity, social status, or gender (3:27-29). All of this takes place in accordance with God’s covenant (3:15). Isaiah 61:1-11 may provide an additional Isaianic background. 119 Within its original context, Isa 61:1-11 follows upon the announcement of God’s intention to display his glory in a redeemed Zion (60:1-22). The transformation of Zion will be so remarkable that the nations will stream to Jerusalem, bringing their wealth in tribute to God’s people (60:6-17). Isaiah 61:1-11, then, describes how Yahweh will bring this promised salvation, first by describing the agent of salvation in 61:1-3 and then the results of that salvation in 61:4-11.120 In Isa 61:1-3, this agent of salvation describes himself and his mission in terms similar to which is established by his suffering (53:5).This conclusion is further supported by the observation that Gal 6:16 alludes to Isa 54:10; see below, 236-38. 119 Within the Second Temple literature that precedes or is contemporaneous with the NT period, only a few references to Isa 61:1-11 may be found. In T. Jud. 24:2-6, the author appears to connect the outpouring of the Spirit with both the messianic figure of Isa 11 and the messenger of good news referred to in Isa 61. In 11Q13:4 the language of captives being freed (Isa 61:1) is linked to the promised messianic Melchizedek figure who will deliver God’s people. Perhaps most substantive is the language of Pss. Sol. 11:7-9, where the hope for Jerusalem’s restoration is expressed in terms of being clothed with the robe of holiness because the Lord proclaims good things to Israel. Yet none of these texts reflects any similarity with Paul’s possible appropriation of Isa 61 here in Gal 3:15-18. Those references found in the rabbinic materials discuss the promise of the eschatological restoration of Jerusalem (TanH Gen. 1:4; 2:4), God’s faithfulness in rewarding Abraham and the righteous (TanH Gen. 1:31; 20:1; 22:1) and even the planting of multiple types of seed (m. Šabbat 9:2). None of these references provides any useful parallel to what Paul is doing in Galatians. 120 Cp. the similar proposed structure of Westermann, Isaiah 40–66, 364-71; Oswalt, Isaiah 40–66, 561-75; slightly different is Koole (Isaiah III, 3:266-68), who breaks off 63:10-11 into a final separate strophe. Childs (Isaiah, 502-3) has an altogether different approach of dividing the chapter into three sections: vv. 1-7, 8-9, 10-11. None of our conclusions depend on deciding the micro-structure of the passage.


159

those found in the servant songs, 121 part of which is proclaiming the gospel (rFEåb;l. / euvaggeli,sasqai).122 This good news consists of “binding up the brokenhearted [bleê-yrEB.v.nIl. vboåx]l; / iva,sasqai tou.j suntetrimme,nouj th/| kardi,a|]” and “proclaiming liberty to captives [rArêD> ‘~yIWbv.li aroÜq.li / khru,xai aivcmalw,toij a;fesin] and freedom to prisoners [x;Aq)-xq;P. ~yrIßWsa]l;w> / tufloi/j avna,bleyin]” (61:1). These actions are all part of the favorable year of Yahweh, which brings judgment upon his enemies and comfort to his people (61:2-3). The results of his work are then recounted in 61:4-11, with a contrast being drawn between the previous state of God’s people and their final condition in the favorable day of the Lord. The ruins will be rebuilt (61:4), foreigners will serve God’s people (61:5), and the redeemed will be known as priests of Yahweh who receive the offerings of the nations (61:6). They will inherit the land a second time (evk deute,raj klhronomh,sousin th.n gh/n; 61:7),123 and Yahweh will establish an eternal covenant with his people Israel (tArïk.a, ~l'ÞA[ tyrIïb.W~h,(l' / diaqh,khn aivw,nion diaqh,somai auvtoi/j; 61:8). Their seed will be known among the nations (~['êr>z: ‘~yIAGB; [d:ÛAnw> / gnwsqh,setai evn toi/j e;qnesin to. spe,rma auvtw/n) and be recognized as those blessed by Yahweh (hw")hy> %r:ïBe [r;z rm:ôa'-hKo) tAYætiaoh' Ar+c.yOw> laeÞr"f.yI yn:±B'-l[; ynIWlêa'v. `ynIWU)c;T. yd:Þy" l[;Poï-l[;w>

evgw. o` kataskeua,saj fw/j kai. poih,saj sko,toj o` poiw/n eivrh,nhn kai. kti,zwn kaka, evgw. ku,rioj o` qeo.j o` poiw/n tau/ta pa,nta 8 euvfranqh,tw o` ouvrano.j a;nwqen kai. ai` nefe,lai ràna,twsan dikaiosu,nhn avnateila,tw h` gh/ e;leoj kai. dikaiosu,nhn avnateila,tw a[ma evgw, eivmi ku,rioj o` kti,saj se 9 poi/on be,ltion kateskeu,asa w`j phlo.n kerame,wj mh. o` avrotriw/n avrotria,sei th.n gh/n o[lhn th.n h`me,ran mh. evrei/ o` phlo.j tw/| keramei/ ti, poiei/j o[ti ouvk evrga,zh| ouvde. e;ceij cei/raj 10 o` le,gwn tw/| patri, ti, gennh,seij kai. th/| mhtri, ti, wvdinh,seij 11 o[ti ou[twj le,gei ku,rioj o` qeo.j o` a[gioj Israhl o` poih,saj ta. evperco,mena evrwth,sate, me peri. tw/n ui`w/n mou kai. peri. tw/n qugate,rwn mou kai. peri. tw/n e;rgwn tw/n ceirw/n mou evntei,lasqe, moi 7

Galatians 4:19 te,kna mou( ou]j pa,lin wvdi,nw me,crij oumorfwqh/| Cristo.j evn u`mi/n\ 19

Within its original context, Isa 45:1-13 announces Yahweh’s plan to use Cyrus as his chosen instrument “for the sake of my servant Jacob [bqoê[]y: Volume 1: Thessalonians, Philippians, Galatians, Philemon (ed. Jouette M. Bassler; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2002), 160-79; idem, Theological Issues, 87-156; and especially R. B. Matlock, Unveiling the Apocalyptic Paul: Paul's Interpreters and the Rhetoric of Criticism (JSNTSup 127; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 1996). On the apocalyptic nature of the use of wvdi,nw in Gal 4:19, see Gaventa, “Maternity,” 192-94; Martyn, Galatians, 426-31. 148 We have listed Isa 66:7-8 under both Israel and Yahweh having birth pangs, because the two are inseparably joined in the passage.


171

yDIäb.[; ‘![;m;’l. / e[neken Iakwb tou/ paido,j mou] and also Israel my chosen one [yrI+yxiB. laeÞr"f.yIw> / kai. Israhl tou/ evklektou/ mou].” (45:4).149 In Isa 45:7-11, Yahweh speaks of his saving action mediated through Cyrus, referring to himself as the one who creates both light and darkness (45:7). After commanding the heavens to pour forth righteousness and salvation (45:8), he rebukes those who question his wisdom (45:9-10), and that rebuke closes with a skeptical question placed in the mouth of those who criticize Yahweh’s ways: “to what are you giving birth [ !yli(yxiT.-hm; / ti, wvdinh,seij]?” Within the context the reference is clearly to the sons that Yahweh is bringing forth from his salvific act (45:11). At this point J. Louis Martyn’s comparison of wvdi,nw in Gal 4:19 and Isa 45:7-11 is particularly insightful.150 He observes four interlocking motifs in both passages: (1) the verb is used in a metaphor; (2) the verb has a direct object;151 (3) Paul is the subject of the verb even though he is male; (4) the offspring are the corporate people of God (Galatian Christians). Martyn then turns to Isa 45:7-11, where wvdi,nw is also used, and notes the following correspondences to Gal 4:19: (1) within the context wvdi,nw is used metaphorically; (2) the verb has a direct object; (3) although the grammatical subject of the verb is feminine, it metaphorically represents God, who is referred to as masculine in 45:1; (4) the child born is the corporate people of God, Israel. In addition to these conceptual parallels, Martyn adds two additional considerations. First, Paul elsewhere uses the imagery of childbirth to refer to his own church planting in 1 Cor 4:14-15; this is analogous to Isaiah’s use of the masculine metaphor of begetting with reference to God (e.g., Isa 42:14). Second, Paul either cites or alludes to portions of Isa 45 in Rom 9:20; 14:11; 1 Cor 14:25 and Phil 2:9-11, which reveals his knowledge of and interest in Isa 45. 152 149 Scholars differ on where Isa 45:1-13 fits within the larger structure of its immediate context. Some, such as Motyer (Prophecy, 356-66), separate 45:9-13 from 45:1-8 and link it to what comes afterwards. But we are persuaded that Childs (Isaiah, 348-49) is closer to the mark in his assessment that 44:24–45:25 is the larger unit, focused on Yahweh’s use of Cyrus as his instrument. For discussion of the links that show a close relationship between 45:1-7 and 44:24-28, see Melugin, Formation, 125. 150 Martyn, Galatians, 426-31; he helpfully moves the focus from the general reference to the apocalyptic use of wvdin,w of Gaventa (“Maternity, 192-94) to an allusion to Isa 45:7-11. 151 When used without a direct object it means to suffer labor pains (or, metaphorically, great anguish); see, e.g., Ps 7:15 (Eng=7:14); Hab 3:10; Philo, Mos. 1, 280. With a direct object it generally means to give birth, whether literally or in a figurative sense; see, e.g., Song 8:5; Philo, Sacr. 1:3; for discussion of this word group in secular Greek, see Bertram, “wvdi,n, wvdi,nw” TDNT 9:667-74. 152 No references to Isa 45:7-11 are present in the extant Second Temple literature prior to the destruction of the temple in A.D. 70; in the immediate aftermath of that event

172


The volume of verbal, structural and thematic connections makes a strong case for an allusion to Isa 45:7-11 in Gal 4:19. But we must also explore the possibility of an echo of Isa 51:1-2 as well. There Israel is summoned to look back to Abraham and Sarah, who is described as “the one who gave birth to you [~k,_l.l,AxT. / th.n wvdi,nousan u`ma/j]” (51:2). By looking back to the origin of their existence as a covenant people, the Galatians too will be blessed and multiplied, and by implication demonstrate that they are in fact children of Abraham. In a similar fashion, in Gal 4:12-20 Paul is pointing the Galatians back to his initial proclamation of the gospel among them, which was the initial time when Paul gave birth to them.153 At that time, because they believed the gospel, the Galatians came into existence as the covenant people of God. By recalling their initial sense of blessing at the reception of Paul’s gospel (4:15), the Galatians will show that they are in fact Abraham’s children, heirs according to the promise. But because the Galatians are wandering from his gospel, Paul must once again writhe in labor pains to see Christ formed in them.154 Although not prominent, the importance of the allusion to Isa 51:1-8 in Gal 3:6-9, along with the conceptual parallels here in Gal 4:19, suggest the possibility of an echo, and at least the probability of a thematic parallel. In summary, we consider it probable that an allusion to Isa 45:7-11 rests behind Gal 4:19, and that an echo or thematic parallel to Isa 51:1-2 is at least possible. The significance of this Isaianic background is summed up well by Martyn: “[Paul] sees in the Teachers’ persecuting activity an instance of the last-ditch effort by which God’s enemies hope to thwart the eschatological redemption of the elect.” 155 Here Paul presents himself as the one through whom the Galatians were born into the Messianic age, in which Christ himself is formed within his people. Just as Christ lives in Paul (Gal 2:20), Paul now seeks to see Christ formed in the Galatians. By reminding the Galatians of their initial both Sib. Or 5.173 and 4 Ezra 8:7 may echo Isa 45:7-11 in their insistence upon the uniqueness of God, but one cannot be certain. Two rabbinic references focus on God’s role as the one creating both peace and evil (Rab. Gen. 1:2; 1:3-5). Consequently, Paul’s use of the imagery does not appear dependent upon any specific Jewish tradition regarding Isa 45:7-11, but may have affinities to the general Jewish apocalyptic expectation of birth pangs accompanying the arrival of the new age; for discussion of thematic parallels in texts such as 1QH 3:7-10; 1 En. 62:4; 2 Bar 56:6; 4 Ezra 4:42, see Gaventa, “Maternity,” 193. 153 Although this is not stated clearly, that would seem to be the implication of Paul’s claim that he is “again [pa,lin]” giving birth to the Galatians. 154 Further support for this proposed echo comes from the probable allusion to Isa 51:18 in Gal 3:6-9 (see discussion above, 136-40). 155 Martyn, Galatians, 430.


173

birth into the Messianic age through his apostolic ministry, Paul seeks to ensure that his labor is not in vain. Our analysis of Gal 4:1-20 has revealed at least three places where an Isaianic background is probable: the use of exodus typology in Gal 4:1-7, Paul’s concern that he may have labored in vain (Gal 4:11), and his claim to be giving birth to the Galatians again (4:19). This last allusion, using as it does the rare verb wvdi,nw, serves to transition to the next part of Paul’s argument in Gal 4:21–5:1. In this final section, Paul drives home his point with a climactic discussion of Abraham, Hagar, and Sarah mediated through his reading of Isa 54:1.

3.2.4 Galatians 4:21–5:1 On any list of difficult NT passages, Gal 4:21–5:1 would certainly rank near the top, and the literature on this passage is significant. 156 While some have regarded this final section as an afterthought in Paul’s thought, our contention is that Gal 4:21–5:1 functions as the climax of the argument begun in Gal 3:1 towards which Paul has steadily been building. After an introductory challenge to his opponents (and all who 156 In addition to the commentaries, see the following: Hanson, Studies, 67-103; C. K. Barrett, "The Allegory of Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar in the Argument of Galatians," in Essays on Paul (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1982), 154-69; Koch, Schrift als Zeuge, 204-11; Mary Callaway, Sing, O Barren One: A Study in Comparative Midrash (SBLDS 91; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1986), 107-14; Charles H. Cosgrove, "The Law has given Sarah no Children (Gal. 4:21-30)," NovT 29 (1987): 219-35; Hays, Echoes, 111-21; Hansen, Abraham in Galatians, 141-54; Karen H. Jobes, "Jerusalem, Our Mother: Metalepsis and Intertextuality in Galatians 4:21-31," WTJ 55 (1993): 299-320; Andrew C. Perriman, "The Rhetorical Strategy of Galatians 4:21-5:1," EvQ 65 (1993): 27-42; Kamila Abrahamova Blessing, "The Background of the Barren Woman Motif in Galatians 4:27" (Ph.D. diss., Duke University, 1996), 306-27; Wilk, Bedeutung, 90-96, 190-94, 23537, 390-91; Susan M. Elliott, "Choose Your Mother, Choose Your Master: Galatians 4:21–5:1 in the Shadow of the Anatolian Mother of the Gods," JBL 118 (1999): 661-83; Michael Bachmann, Antijudaismus im Galaterbrief? Exegetische Studien zu einem polemischen Schreiben und zur Theologie des Apostels Paulus (NTOA 40; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1999), 127-58; J. C. O'Neill, "'For this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia' (Galatians 4:25)," in The Old Testament in the New Testament: Essays in Honour of J.L. North (ed. Steve Moyise and J. L. North; JSNTSup 189; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic, 2000), 210-19; Torsten Löfstedt, "The Allegory of Hagar and Sarah: Gal 4.21-31," EstBib 58 (2000): 475-94; Robert L. Brawley, "Contextuality, Intertextuality, and the Hendiadic Relationship of Promise and Law in Galatians," ZNW 93 (2002): 99-119; Martinus C. De Boer, "Paul's Quotation of Isaiah 54.1 in Galatians 4.27," NTS 50 (2004): 370-89; Brigitte Kahl, "Hagar between Genesis and Galatians: The Stony Road to Freedom," in From Prophecy to Testament: The Function of the Old Testament in the New (ed. Craig A. Evans; Peabody: Hendrickson, 2004), 219-32; Steven Di Mattei, "Paul's Allegory of the Two Covenants (Gal 4.21-31) in Light of First Century Hellenistic Rhetoric and Jewish Hermeneutics," NTS 52 (2006): 102-22.

174


are sympathetic to their view) to listen to what the Law says (4:21), this section divides into three components: 157 establishing the components of the trope (4:22-23), explaining the components of the trope (4:24-28), and exploring the implications of the trope for the Galatians (4:29– 5:1).158 A closer look at these divisions is warranted. The components of the trope are drawn from key portions of Genesis 12–25, with particular emphasis placed on Gen 16–21. On the one hand there is the son (Ishmael) born from the slave woman (Hagar) in accordance with the flesh; on the other there is the son (Isaac) born from the free woman (Sarah) through the promise (4:22-23). When Paul turns to the explanation of the components (4:24-28), he begins by identifying the two women (Hagar and Sarah are the antecedent of au-tai) as two covenants: the Sinaitic covenant, represented by Hagar, and the Abrahamic covenant (understood christologically), represented by Sarah.159 The point of contact between Hagar and Sinai according to Paul is that both are mothers who bear children into slavery (4:24). Regardless of the original reading of 4:25,160 the main point seems clear 157 In arguing that 4:28 introduces a new beginning within the passage, Cosgrove (“Law,” 222) contends that the combination of avdelfoi, + de, never introduces a logical conclusion in Paul; instead such conclusions always contain a particle such as a;ra, ou=n, or w[ste. From this Cosgrove concludes that 4:28 cannot be the conclusion to the allegory. But Cosgrove’s dismissal of 4:28 as the conclusion of the allegory does not take into account that several of the other occurrences of avdelfoi, + de, are transitional in nature, advancing a conclusion from what precedes it and advancing that conclusion further; see, e.g., Rom 1:13; 1 Cor 4:6; 14:6; 15:50. Therefore it seems best to recognize the transitional nature of 4:28 regardless of whether one groups it with what precedes or follows it; cf. the similar conclusion of Jobes, “Jerusalem,” 301. 158 Following Jobes (“Jerusalem,” 299), we have used the term “trope” (defined as a literary device in which the words used have a sense other than, though not necessarily in contradiction to, the literal sense) instead of the more common “allegory” or “typology” to avoid the baggage that comes with them. 159 Since Paul leaves unexpressed the covenant identified with Sarah (who is also left unnamed), the reader is forced to fill in this gap. The result is that scholars disagree as to what covenant Paul contrasts with the Sinaitic. Traditionally the answer has been the new covenant in Christ; see, e.g., Betz, Galatians, 243-4; Cole, Galatians, 1801; Rohde, Galater, 195-6; R. Longenecker, Galatians, 211. However, a growing number of scholars have argued that Paul is instead referring to the Abrahamic covenant; see, e.g., Bruce, Galatians, 218; Matera, Galatians, 175-6. Instead of forcing a choice between the two positions, a mediating position is possible: the contrast is with the Abrahamic covenant (after all, this has been the focus of Gal 3–4) understood christologically; cp. Hays, Echoes, 114-5; Witherington, Grace in Galatia, 331-2. 160 The textual problem is significant, and as a result certainty is not possible. As it currently stands, NA27 reads to. de. ~Aga.r Sina/ o;roj evsti.n evn th/| VArabi,a|. The issue centers on the phrase de. ~Aga.r Sina; some manuscripts have ga,r instead of de, (e.g. K P Y), some omit ~Aga,r (p46), some have ga,r instead of de, and omit Sina/ (itd,e), and still others have ga,r instead of de, and omit ~Aga,r (a C G). Fortunately our argument here does not depend on choosing a particular reading. For a discussion of the various readings and their respective merits, see Franz Mussner, "Hagar, Sinai, Jerusalem,"


175

enough: Hagar/Sinai “corresponds [sustoicei/]” to the present Jerusalem, because she too is enslaved along with her children.161 Thus, Paul extends the first side of the comparison to Hagar/Sinai/ present Jerusalem, and in doing so he completes his explanation of the first column of the comparison. The de, in Gal 4:26 marks the shift to the other side of the comparison. Opposite the “present Jerusalem” Paul posits the “Jerusalem above [h` … a;nw VIerousalh,m].”162 In response to Paul’s opponents’ effort to bring the Galatians under the yoke of the Law and in alignment with Jerusalem, Paul argues that the Galatians are in fact descendants of Jerusalem: the heavenly one that is the culmination of God’s redemptive purposes. Not only do the Galatians have a mother in the heavenly Jerusalem; they have a mother that is free from the slavery of the Law. Given the fact that Paul is drawing a comparison between two sets of related ideas, at this point it will be helpful to lay them out in parallel columns:163 TQ 135 (1955): 56-60; idem, Galaterbrief, 322-25; Martin McNamara, ""to de (Hagar) Sina oros estin en tê Arabia" (Gal. 4:25a): Paul and Petra," Mils 2 (1978): 24-41; Cosgrove, “Law,” 227-9; Elliott, “Choose Your Mother,” 667-8. Metzger is probably correct when he concludes “after ga,r had replaced de, in some witnesses, the juxtaposition of ga.r ~Aga,r led to the accidental omission sometimes of ga,r and sometimes ~Aga.r”; see Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (2d ed.; New York: United Bible Societies, 1994), 527. 161 The exact referent of “present Jerusalem” is not clear. Is Paul referring to the city of Jerusalem as the center and source of his opponents’ authority (R. Longenecker, Galatians, 213), the Jerusalem church as proponent of the Law-observant Gentile mission (Martyn, Galatians, 439, 457-66), or Judaism as focused on Torah-observance centered in Jerusalem (Bruce, Galatians, 220)? It seems fair to conclude that Paul’s opponents placed great importance on their ties to Jerusalem (Paul’s relationship to the Jerusalem church is a major subject in Gal 1:11–2:10). Given his assertion that now that Christ has come the Law is no longer the means by which God’s people relate to God or others, the “present Jerusalem” likely refers to any and all who place the Law at the center of their understanding of relating to God and others, regardless of whether they claim to be Christ-followers or not; cp. similarly Cosgrove, “Law,” 230. 162 The idea of a heavenly Jerusalem as part of the consummation of God’s redemptive plan has its roots in the OT itself (Ps 87:3; Isa 54; and especially Ezek 40–48), and was developed significantly in Second Temple Judaism (1 Enoch 53:6; 90:28-29; 2 Enoch 55:2; 4 Ezra 10:25-28). This theme finds expression elsewhere in the NT in Heb 11:1016; 12:22; 13:14 and especially in Rev 21:10-27. For a recent survey of the relevant data, see Pilchan Lee, The New Jerusalem in the Book of Revelation: A Study of Revelation 21–22 in the Light of its Background in Jewish Tradition (WUNT 129; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2001), 53-229. 163 Jobes (“Jerusalem,” 317) cautions against forcing too tight a parallelism between Hagar and Sarah, since Paul intentionally leaves the Sarah side of the comparison incomplete; in this she follows Koch, Schrift als Zeuge, 205-6. This caution is prudent, but should not prohibit careful exploration of the potential parallels. By using the verb sustoice,w in Gal 4:25, which can mean “to stand in the same oppositional col-

176


“Abraham had two sons” One from the slave woman (22) One from the free woman (22) Born according to the flesh (23) (born) through the promise (23) Covenant from Mt Sinai (24) (Abrahamic covenant christologically understood) Bears children into slavery (24) (bears children into freedom) Hagar (24) (Jerusalem above) is our mother (26) Hagar is Mt. Sinai in Arabia ???????????????? (25) Present Jerusalem (25) Jerusalem above (26) Enslaved with her children (25) Free (with her children) (26)

The entries in parentheses are those which Paul does not make explicit, but which we consider likely to be implicit. The reader will observe that we have supplied two suggestions that we consider probable, one of which (“bears children into freedom”) we consider all but certain. The other (“Abrahamic covenant understood christologically”) we have argued for above. 164 Yet we have refrained from supplying an opposite for “Hagar is Mt. Sinai in Arabia”; no suitable parallel seems probable in our estimation.165 It is at this point in his argument that Paul introduces the citation from Isa 54:1 (Gal 4:27). Galatians 4:27 ge,graptai ga,r\ euvfra,nqhti( stei/ra h` ouv ti,ktousa( r`h/xon kai. bo,hson( h`

Isaiah 54:1 LXX euvfra,nqhti stei/ra h` ouv ti,ktousa r`h/xon kai. bo,hson h` ouvk wvdi,nousa

umn” (a meaning which Martyn, Galatians, 449-50, places a great deal of emphasis upon), Paul at least encourages the reader to complete the comparison. Perhaps, as Jobes (“Jerusalem,” 318-19) suggests, Paul did not complete the columns because he can assume the Galatians will fill in those gaps from his previous teaching. Yet in any attempt to fill the gaps one must be diligent not to place undue importance upon one’s proposed completion of the columns, especially given the divergent proposals made by various scholars; see, e.g., Betz, Galatians, 245-46; R. Longenecker, Galatians, 213-14; Martyn, Galatians, 449-57. 164 See above n. 159. 165 R. Longenecker (Galatians, 213-14) suggests “Mt. Zion” as the implied parallel, citing Heb 12:18-24, where Mt. Sinai and Mt. Zion are contrasted. While it is possible that Paul may have completed the trope this way, the fact that Paul nowhere refers explicitly to Mt. Zion makes Longenecker’s conclusion tentative at best. The noun Siw,n occurs only twice in Paul (Rom 9:33; 11:26), both of which are in OT citations.


ouvk wvdi,nousa\ o[ti polla. ta. te,kna th/j evrh,mou ma/llon h' th/j evcou,shj to.n a;ndra

177

o[ti polla. ta. te,kna th/j evrh,mou ma/llon h' th/j evcou,shj to.n a;ndra ei=pen ga.r ku,rioj

He has adopted the quote word for word from the LXX, 166 and introduces it with the familiar ge,graptai followed by an explanatory ga,r. What this ga,r explains, however, is not entirely clear; does it merely ground the claim that the Jerusalem above is “our mother,” or does it elucidate the entirety of the comparison reaching back to 4:22? There are at least three indications of the latter. First, Isa 54:1 contains a contrast between two women who both bear children, which is exactly how the trope is introduced in 4:22. Second, the number of Isaianic allusions and echoes from Isa 51–54 throughout Gal 3–4 suggest that these chapters were in mind as Paul composed the letter, making it probable that Paul’s telling of the Hagar-Sarah trope is shaped by them. Third, Paul refers to himself as experiencing labor pains in his efforts to see Christ formed in the Galatians (4:19), using the same rare verb (wvdi,nw) that occurs in the citation of Isa 54:1.167 By doing so Paul signals that even at this point in his argument he is anticipating the citation of Isa 54:1, and as we shall see below, laying the groundwork for a rhetorical tour de force. Taken together, these factors suggest that the entirety of Hagar-Sarah trope has been decisively crafted in light of Isa 54:1, a conclusion we will return to later in our discussion of the role Isa 54:1 played in shaping the entirety of Gal 3–4. On one level it is apparent that the barren woman described in the first three lines of Isa 54:1 is Sarah, while the “one who has a husband” refers to Hagar. But what does it mean to say that Hagar had a husband? After all, Abraham was Sarah’s husband, not Hagar’s; Hagar was merely the maidservant whereas Sarah was the wife. Surprisingly, this potential anomaly in the text is rarely commented upon, but it warrants further investigation.168 To answer this question we must look at the

166 Paul does omit the final phrase ei=pen ga.r ku,rioj, but this omission is insignificant. The LXX is a straightforward translation of the MT. 167 See the discussion above, 168-73. 168 In the commentaries, Fung (Galatians, 210-11), and Martyn (Galatians, 443), are among the few who even attempt to determine how implying Hagar had a husband fits the Galatians context. Hays (“Galatians,” 304) simply concludes that not every detail of the citation can be pressed, admitting that this last line of Isa 54:1 does not neatly fit into Paul’s argument. The same lacuna is present in most focused treat-

178


statement on three levels: first within its Isaianic context, then within the context of Gen 16–21 as presented by Paul, and finally within the situation in Galatia. Within the larger context of Isa 49–54 the commands to “shout for joy [yNIïr" / euvfra,nqhti]” and “break forth [yxi’c.Pi / r`h/xon]” addressed to the barren woman in 54:1 reach all the way back to Isa 49:13,169 where the same two imperatives are addressed to Zion in light of the promised salvation announced in the commission of the Servant in 49:1-12.170 Here too in Isa 54:1 Zion is called to rejoice in her salvation; the key difference being that what is only promised in 49:1-12 has now been accomplished by the suffering Servant of 52:13–53:12.171 Reference to the “barren one” (hr"Þq'[] / h` ouv ti,ktousa) and the “one who has not given birth in pain” (hl'x'-ê al{ ‘ylih]c;w> / h` ouvk wvdi,nousa) hearken back at least to 51:1-2, where Sarah is referred to as the one “who gave birth to you in

ments of Gal 4:21-31 as well, Jobes (“Jerusalem,” 302, 304) and De Boer (“Paul’s Quotation,” 371 n. 3, 379-80) being among the few exceptions. 169 The identity of the barren woman is not specified in Isa 54:1; from the larger context of Isa 49–54 it seems rather clear that it refers to Zion/Jerusalem. She is referred to as the spouse of Yahweh (54:5-6; cp. 50:1-3) whose descendants will be so numerous that they will overwhelm her (54:1-3; cp. 49:19-21). The Targum makes the identification explicit by inserting ~l;vwrUy> twice in 54:1, but perhaps even more strikingly interprets the married woman as “inhabited Rome” (at'bytey" ymeAr). Koole (Isaiah III, 2:350) notes that Zion has not been mentioned by name since 52:8, which immediately follows the proclamation of “good news [rFEb ï m; . / euvaggelizome,nou]” in 52:7; could Paul have noticed the same connection? 170 The combination of the verbs !n:r' and xc;P' in the same verse occurs only in Ps 98:4; Isa 44:23; 49:13; 52:9; 54:1. All of these occurrences have both verbs in the imperative mood; the lone exception is 49:13, where the MT reads Wxc.p.yI (jussive), but it should be noted that the Ketib reading is Wxïc.piW (imperative). Even if the jussive is original, since it has the force of the imperative, the point stands. Even more significant is the fact that the corresponding Greek imperatives in the LXX (euvfrai,nw and r`hg, numi) appear together in the same verse in the imperative mood only in Isa 49:13 and 54:1. These two Greek verbs do appear together in 1 Kgs 1:40, but there they render two different Hebrew verbs and are in the indicative mood. In the other places where the combination of the verbs !n:r' and xc;P' appears the LXX renders them with different verbs. In Psa 98:4, they are rendered with avlala,xate and avgallia/sqe, respectively. While in Isa 44:23 euvfra,nqhte does render WN“r", the imperative WxÜc.Pi is not represented in the LXX (which reads salpi,sate, “sound the trumpet,” which is either a periphrastic rendering by the LXX translator or perhaps evidence of a different Hebrew original that has subsequently been lost. The fact that nowhere else in the LXX is the verb xc;P' rendered with a form of salpi,zw makes the latter more likely). In Isa 52:9 it appears the translator collapsed the two Hebrew imperatives into the single Greek imperative r`hxa,tw, but with the accompanying substantive euvfrosu,nhn (which of course is loosely related to the verb euvfrai,nw). 171 Melugin (Formation, 174) also notes the pivotal role of Isa 52:13-53:12 as a bridge between what precedes and follows it. The similarity in in the line of thought within 49:1-12 and that of chs. 53 to 54 is also noted by van Hoonacker, Isaias, 260-61, (cited in Koole, Isaiah III, 2:347).


179

pain” (~k,_l.l,AxT. / th.n wvdi,nousan u`ma/j).172 There the faithful remnant is exhorted to recall the past dealings of Yahweh with Abraham and Sarah as a means of encouragement to believe that Yahweh will in fact com/ parakale,sw) Zion (51:3). In 52:9, following on the heels of the fort ( announcement of the “good news” (rFeªb;m. / euvaggelizome,nou), Isaiah uses the exact same imperatives found in 49:13 and 54:1 to summon the people to respond to the fact that Yahweh “has comforted [ ~x;ÛnI / hvle,hsen] his people.” This comfort comes through the ministry of the Servant expressed in 52:13–53:12, who offers himself as a sin-bearing sacrifice on behalf of the people. Therefore by tracing the thread of the barren woman in Isa 49–54 we discover that the Abrahamic covenant and restoration of Zion are merged together in the culmination of God’s saving purposes.173 As we shall see below, Paul has similarly merged these two motifs together in Galatians. Within traditional Jewish exegesis of Isa 54:1,174 the barren woman was often understood to refer to post-exilic Israel and the married woman to her pagan enemies.175 From that perspective it would seem most natural to regard Babylon as the original referent. But an alternative reading is also possible, and in our estimation more plausible. Rather than seeing a contrast between Israel and her enemies, the two women represent Jerusalem at two different phases in her existence. 176 On this understanding the prophet is comparing Zion’s formerly barren status with her future, in which her descendants will be so numerous

~x;’nI

172 On the connections between Isa 51:1-3 and 54:1, see van der Merwe, Pentateuchtradisies, 90-145; William A. Beuken, "Isaiah liv: The Multiple Identity of the Person Addressed," OTS 19 (1973): 29-70, esp. 38-43. 173 Cf. also van Uchelen, “Abraham,” 183-90; Beuken, “Isaiah liv,” 38-47; Callaway, Sing, 63-70; Jobes, “Jerusalem,” 307-9; Odil H. Steck, Gottesknecht und Zion: Gesammelte Aufsätze zu Deuterojesaja (FAT 4; Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (P. Siebeck), 1992). 174 For treatment of the use of Isa 54:1 within the Second Temple period, see esp. Blessing, “Barren Woman,” 205-305. 175 For examples see Str-B 3:574-75 and the discussions in Koole, Isaiah III, 2:352-53 and especially Wilk, Bedeutung, 190-95. Wilk identifies three different lines of interpretation in the rabbinic materials: (1) a promise of salvation for the remnant of Zion (Pesiq. Rab Kah. 18:3); (2) a polemical use to show the correct way to participate in God’s salvation (b. Ber. 10a; Midr. KlglR 1:5); (3) a reinterpretation of the story of God’s dealings with Israel focused on God’s care for the infertile matriarchs (Aggadat Bereschit 52; Pesiq. Rab Kah. 20:1-5; Midr. KlglR 4:4). He also notes that a fragment of Isa 54:11 found at Qumran (4Q164 [=pIsd]) suggests that the community there understood itself “als proleptische Erfüllung der Verheißung des neuen Jerusalem” (193). Philo (Praem. 158) interprets Isa 54:1 as “an allegory of the history of the soul.” 176 Cf. van de Merwe, Pentateuchtradisies, 115; Beuken, “Isaiah liv,” 37-47; Koole, Isaiah III, 2:350-51; S. L. Stassen, "Marriage (and related) Metaphors in Isaiah 54:1-17," Journal for Semitics 6 (1994): 57-73; R. Abma, Bonds of Love: Methodic Studies of Prophetic Texts with Marriage Imagery (Isaiah 50:1-3 and 54:1-10, Hosea 1–3, Jeremiah 2–3) (SSN 40; Assen: Van Gorcum, 1999), 95-97, 104-5.

180


that Zion’s former boundaries will be insufficient to contain them (54:13). This interpretation may have contributed to the development of the exegetical tradition of an eschatological/heavenly Jerusalem mentioned above.177 It is this tradition that Paul appears to draw upon in positing a contrast between the present Jerusalem and the Jerusalem above in 4:25-26. Turning to Gen 16–21 as retold by Paul, the woman who has a husband clearly refers to Hagar. At face value that seems blatantly wrong, but further inquiry reveals the legitimacy of claiming that Hagar had a husband. We must begin with the Greek expression found in Isa 54:1 — th/j evcou,shj to.n a;ndra, which is a translation of hl'WÞ [b., a qal passive feminine participle of l[;B' (“to marry”).178 The construction e;cw + avnh,r occurs in the LXX (Tob 3:8), secular Greek (e.g. Aristotle, Cat. 15) and the NT (1 Cor 7:2) to refer to sexual intercourse, and perhaps that is the meaning that Paul sees in Isa 54:1 when looking back at Gen 16–21 through the lens of Isa 54:1.179 But we must also note how Gen 16:3 describes the act of Sarah giving Hagar to Abram: “she [Sarah] gave her [Hagar] to Abram her husband as his wife [e;dwken auvth.n Abram tw/| avndri. auvth/j auvtw/| gunai/ka / hV'(ail. Alï Hv'Þyai ~r"îb.a;l. Ht'²ao !TEïTiw:].” So in seeing that Hagar is referred to as Abram’s wife in Gen 16:3, we can understand how Paul could see a reference to Hagar in the final line of Isa 54:1. But at the same time, what distinguishes Hagar from Sarah as Abram’s wife is the fact that Abram’s sexual union with Hagar produced a child. So in that sense the inherent ambiguity of the construction e;cw + avnh,r allows both the sexual and marital aspects to emerge regarding Hagar. But now we come to the most difficult task — how is the reference to a husband to be understood within the trope of Gal 4:21–5:1? If in fact Paul intends the reader to make any association, the most likely candidate is husband = Law. 180 Four arguments may be advanced in 177 See above, n. 162. 178 Isa 54:1 is the only place in the LXX where l[;B' is translated by the construction e;cw + avnh,r. 179 See H. Hanse, “e;cw,” TDNT 2:817, n. 5. 180 Cp. John Bligh, Galatians: A Discussion of St. Paul's Epistle (Householder Commentaries 1; London: St. Paul Publications, 1969), 403-4. However, we do not draw the same conclusions as Bligh does from this association. In response to Bligh’s equation of husband = Law in Gal 4:27, Jobes (“Jerusalem,” 304) raises three objections: (1) Bligh wrongly argues that being married was an OT metaphor for being under the law and barrenness an OT metaphor for being free from law; (2) this equation does not fit Paul’s argument since Sarah was married to Abraham but she is called barren and associated with a law-free Jerusalem; (3) Bligh wrongly concludes that Paul’s point is that Gentile Christians will eventually outnumber the Jews. In response to Jobes, we would note the following. (1) Bligh does not claim that marriage was an OT metaphor for being under law, nor that barrenness is an OT metaphor for free-


181

support. First, Paul uses the imagery of marriage to describe a person’s relationship to the Law in Rom 7:2-6. There we also see the imagery of bearing fruit for God (which Paul discusses later in Gal 5:16-25), resurrection (which, as we will argue below, is fundamental to Paul’s thought here in Gal 4:21–5:1), and being under bondage (which is central to Paul’s rejection of the Law here in Gal 3–4). All three of these motifs are present in the larger argument of Gal 3–5, and all within close proximity to Gal 4:21–5:1. This Pauline parallel establishes the possibility that a similar nexus of ideas is present in Gal 4:21–5:1. Second, Paul has already associated Hagar/Sinai/slavery, so adding Law to that side of the column does nothing more than make explicit what is implicit in the reference to Sinai. Third, husband = Law coheres with the larger argument of the trope that those who are currently without husband/Law (by which Paul refers to the church, the Israel of God in which Jew and Gentile together are in Christ) are in fact the fulfillment of the promise of abundant seed from Sarah, and thus have no need for a husband/Law because they have already received the promised blessing of Abraham. Finally, if Cosgrove is correct in concluding that Paul understands the barrenness of Sarah-Jerusalem to extend until its eschatological fulfillment in Christ to mean that “the law has given Sarah no children,”181 then it is a small step to conclude that just as Sarah’s attempt in Gen 16 to have children through Hagar was attempting to accomplish an end for which God had a different means, so too is the use of the Law as a husband to bring forth children into the eschatological Jerusalem by Paul’s opponents.182 Before discussing how Isa 54:1 is used in Gal 4:27, we must briefly summarize the remainder of the pericope. Determining whether Gal 4:28 belongs with the explanation of the trope in 4:24-27 or the implications of the trope spelled out in Gal 4:29–5:1 is difficult. Perhaps it is best to conclude with Jobes that it functions as a transition between the two and as such contains elements of both. 183 Therefore, Gal 4:28 makes dom from law. He claims instead that based on Rom 7:2, where Paul associates being under law to being married, there is Pauline warrant for equating being under law with marriage. (2) As noted above, Gen 16:3 indicates that Hagar was in fact Abram’s wife, and here in Gal 4:22-25 Paul has already associated Hagar/slavery/Sinai. Extending the association to Law seems perfectly consistent with Paul’s argument here. (3) Jobes rightly rejects Bligh’s conclusion that the point of contrast rests in the number of Gentile Christians versus Jews, but one can still see a reference to the Law in the husband of Gal 4:27 without reaching Bligh’s conclusion. 181 Cosgrove, “Law,” 230-31. 182 Even if one is inclined to dismiss the connection between husband and Law here in Gal 4:21–5:1, our larger argument remains unaffected. 183 Jobes, “Jerusalem,” 301.

182


the final identification to complete the trope, equating the Galatians with Isaac as children of promise. Yet at the same time it introduces Isaac to address the theme of persecution that occupies Gal 4:29–5:1. Ishmael’s persecution of Isaac prefigures that which the Galatians are experiencing at the hands of Paul’s opponents. 184 It is this analogy that allows Paul to use Sarah’s words in Gen 21:10 as the Scriptures’ imperative to the Galatians to cast out Paul’s enslaved opponents. As children of the free woman, the Galatians are to stand firm in that freedom, and refuse the yoke of slavery (i.e., Torah-observance) offered by Paul’s opponents (4:31–5:1). We are now positioned to examine Paul’s use of Isa 54:1 in Gal 4:27. From a hermeneutical perspective, Isa 54:1 functions as the lens through which Paul reads Gen 16–21.185 In other words, Paul transforms the story of Abraham, Hagar, Sarah, Ishmael, and Isaac through his gospel-centered reading of Isa 54:1, which provided him with the necessary categories to demonstrate that the Galatians are in fact fullblooded children of Abraham, rightful recipients of the covenant promises. But why Isa 54:1? Barrett has suggested that Paul’s choice is “in a sense arbitrary; he takes from it what he brings to it. But what he brings to it is not arbitrarily chosen, for the theme that he (rightly) sees in Isaiah is the theme of privilege, and of God’s concern for the unprivileged.”186 Our analysis has suggested, however, that Paul’s choice of Isa 54:1 is far more intentional. Perriman is closer to the mark when he suggests, “the value of the quotation from Is. 54:-1 [sic.], which in its original context referred to the former and future Jerusalems, lies in the fact that it provides a remarkably apposite expression for the merging of the Abrahamic and Zionist themes: it mediates rhetorically, if not logically, between v. 26 (the Jerusalem above is our mother) and v. 28 (like Isaac we are children of promise).”187 This assessment is good as far as it goes, but more can be said; the rationale lies deeper. Jobes strikes the correct chord when she concludes:

184 Genesis 21:9 does not explicitly state that Ishmael “persecuted [evdi,wken]” Isaac; it merely states that Sarah saw him “playing” or “joking” (qxe(c;m. / pai,zonta). Jewish tradition (represented in both the Targums and the rabbinic materials), however, does mention Ishmael’s persecution of Isaac, though they differ in the nature of that persecution; see esp. Tg. Ps.-J. Gen 22:1 and the discussion of other key texts in R. Longenecker, Galatians, 202-3. Thus it would appear that Paul is drawing on Jewish tradition to fill in this “gap” in the story. 185 For a similar claim, see De Boer, “Paul’s Quotation,” 388. 186 Barrett, “Allegory,” 167. 187 Perriman, “Rhetorical,” 41.


183

Sarah’s identity as the barren woman to whom God promises a miraculous birth merges with that of the barren one of Isa 54:1 at only one point in history—when Jesus, the seed of Abraham (and hence the son of Sarah) arose from the grave to be the firstborn son of New Jerusalem. In Gal 3:l6 Paul announces that Jesus is the son (“seed”) promised to Abraham, and therefore Jesus is Sarah’s son. I believe Paul is arguing that the nation which God promised to bring from Sarah’s dead womb and the population of the new Jerusalem prophesied by Isaiah are those people who are born through the resurrection of Jesus, not those who are circumcised. Just as the birth of Isaac eventually issued in the population of earthly Jerusalem by his descendants, the resurrection of Jesus issues in the populating of the new Jerusalem. The faithful mother-city of Zion was desolate because of sin and had no inhabitants until the sinless Jesus rose from the dead. (Do I hear an echo of Gen 3:24?) When Paul cites Isa 54:1, he is metaleptically announcing to the Galatians that when Jesus arose from death, all of the elect seed of Abraham were also born. In this way Paul not only establishes Christians as rightful heirs of the Abrahamic covenant as it was fulfilled in Christ, but at the same time disinherits those who reject Christ’s resurrection, though they may be circumcised . . . . Far from being an arbitrary allegorical assignment, the association of Hagar with the “now” Jerusalem and Sarah with the “above” Jerusalem follows logically from Paul’s understanding of Isa 54:1 in light of Christ’s resurrection . . . . He is transforming the story of Sarah and Hagar from narrative history to (realized) prophetic proclamation just as Isaiah did.188

In support of Jobes’s conclusion we would add that Paul gives indications that not only is his reading of Gen 16–21 as explained in Gal 4:21– 5:1 shaped by his gospel-centric understanding of Isa 54:1, his reading of the entire Abraham story (stretching from Gen 12–21) as presented in Gal 3–4 is dictated by his gospel centered understanding of Isa 51-54. Detailed argumentation of this claim will be given below, 189 but here it will suffice to note that others have noted multiple points of contact throughout Gal 3–4 with Isaiah, and these chapters in particular.190 Theologically, Paul uses Isa 54:1 to argue that the fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant has come in Christ the promised seed, and through his resurrection the new / heavenly Jerusalem has been born and begun to bring forth children (all who belong to Christ by faith). In this way the promise made to Abraham that “all the nations shall be blessed in you” (Gal 3:8 = Gen 12:3) is being fulfilled. Paul thus picks up the Isaianic transformation of Sarah’s barrenness from a story of God’s

188 Jobes, “Jerusalem,” 316-8 (emphasis mine). 189 See below, 185-202. 190 See esp. Jobes, “Jerusalem,” 306-15; De Boer, “Paul’s Quotation,” 387-89.

184


past faithfulness to a promise of his future saving action, 191 and interprets that through the Christ event. Thus in one very strong sense, Paul’s use of Isa 54:1 is profoundly salvation-historical.192 Yet at the same time, one must not underestimate the note of discontinuity that is present as well. Paul does not draw a straight line of continuity from Abraham to Christ and his people through the Mosaic covenant. Cosgrove perceptively observes: What Paul secures from Isaiah is the suggestion that Sarah remained barren throughout history until the coming of her child, Christ (recall Gal 3:16, 19), and with him her many children (believers in Christ; see 3:29, tou/ VAbraa.m spe,rma). Here, then, is the argument: if Is. 54:1, in speaking of Sarah-Jerusalem, implies that her barreness extends until the eschatological time of fulfillment, then the law has given Sarah no children. And with this point Paul reinforces in the strongest possible terms the repeated accent in Galatians of life (the Spirit, the realization of the promise, access to the inheritance, the blessing of Abraham) is not to be found in the Torah. 193

Finally, on a rhetorical level, Paul uses Isa 54:1 to enable the Galatians to read both Gen 16–21 and their own situation properly, and in doing so summons them to realize that they are already children of the free woman.194 As such, they should not take on Torah observance, since the Law was unable to produce children into freedom. Furthermore, by leading the Galatians to identify themselves as full-blooded children of promise (like Isaac) through the use of Isa 54:1, Paul prepares them to hear the imperative of Gen 21:10 (Gal 4:30). Expelling the troublemakers is necessary to preserve their freedom in Christ, a subject Paul discusses in connection with the eschatological Spirit in Gal 5–6.

191 See Jobes, “Jerusalem,” 307-9, who follows Callaway, Sing, 63-65; for a slightly different understanding, see Blessing, “Background,” 306-29. 192 Paul’s salvation-historical use of Isa 54:1 is in sharp contrast to the way it is used in Wis 3:13. There the author employs the imagery of the barren woman as a symbol of the righteous life despite suffering. Noticeably absent are any notions of fulfillment or progress within God’s redemptive purposes; instead the barren woman (along with the righteous sufferer of Isa 52:13–53:12 and the eunuch of Isa 56:3) is presented as analogous to those whom the author addresses in the midst of their suffering. 193 Cosgrove, “Law,” 231. 194 Again, a contrast is provided by Wis 3:13 and its larger context. Whereas Paul intends his audience to identify themselves with the correct figure(s) in his retelling of the Sarah/Hagar story, the author of Wisdom of Solomon wants his audience to imitate the correct figure(s). Such a difference rests not only in the different purposes in writing but in theological differences as well. Paul is reading Isaiah from a distinctly eschatological perspective that sees fulfillment of these promises in Christ and the birth of the church, whereas the author of Wisdom of Solomon has little interest in eschatology other than the final judgment itself.

185

Synthesis

Yet there may also be an additional rhetorical use of Isa 54:1 worth considering. Paul may be encouraging an additional alignment of the characters in the trope: Hagar Present Jerusalem Paul’s opponents

Ishmael Enslaved children Followers of Paul’s opponents

Sarah Jerusalem above Paul

Isaac Free children Paul’s followers

If such an alignment is intended, however subtly, Paul would then be using Isa 54:1 to reconfigure both the reading of Gen 16–21 and the current situation in Galatia in a favorable way so that his ministry among them is perceived to be the means by which the Galatians were born as children of the free woman (cf. Gal 4:19). By doing so, Paul provokes the Galatians to ask the question, “If Paul’s gospel has birthed us into freedom, why would we want to abandon that freedom for the slavery of the Law offered by the troublemakers?” The answer is obvious: “We wouldn’t!” Once the Galatians have reached that realization, the command to expel the troublemakers seems like the natural response.

3.2.5 Summary of Isaianic Influence in Galatians 3–4 Our survey of Isaianic influence in Galatians 3–4 has revealed numerous points of contact. More specifically, we have seen that a good number of these allusions, echoes, and the only explicit citation in all of Galatians come largely from Isa 51–54. In the next section we will explore the significance of this observation.

3.3 Synthesis Synthesis Our investigation of Gal 3–4 has revealed numerous points of contact with Isaiah 40–66, and in particular chs. 51–54. But is there any coherence to these Isaianic appropriations? At this point a summary chart of our proposed Isaianic allusions and echoes in Gal 3–4 will prove helpful.

186 Galatians Gal 3:2, 5 Gal 3:6-9 Gal 3:8 Gal 3:13 Gal 3:14, 16 Gal 3:16 Gal 3:15-18 Gal 4:1-7


Subject Hearing of faith Look to Abraham Gospel preached Christ as a curse for us Blessing, seed of Abraham, Spirit Singular seed Æ plural seed Covenant, promise, seed, inheritance New exodus 1. new creation 2. Servant 3. Abraham/seed

Gal 4:11 Gal 4:19

Labor in vain Paul’s birth pangs

Gal 4:27

Rejoice barren one

Isaianic Background Isa 53:1 Isa 51:1-8 Isa 52:7-10 Isa 53 Isa 44:3-5 Isa 41:8; 53:10; 54:3 Isa 54:3-10; 61:7-10 Isa 41:17-20; 43:16-21; 51:9-10 (new creation Isa 52:11-12; 52:1353:12 (Servant) Isa 41:8, 17-20; 51:1-8 (Abraham/seed) Isa 49:4 Isa 45:7-11; 51:1-2; 54:1 Isa 54:1

The sequence of allusions and echoes suggests the intriguing possibility that Paul has to some extent framed his argument in Gal 3–4 based on his reading of Isa 51–54. By way of preliminary observation, we note that behind Gal 3:6-9 (where Paul begins his discussion of Abraham) lies Isa 51:1-8. At the end of his discussion of Abraham in Gal 4:21–5:1, Paul then cites Isa 54:1 as the climax of his argument. 195 Thus we see the tantalizing prospect that Isa 51:1-8 and Isa 54:1 serve as bookends for Paul’s presentation of Abraham. In between the chart further suggests that Paul draws on other portions of Isa 51–54 in expounding Abraham between Gal 3:6-9 and 4:21–5:1, though he has also drawn from additional passages from Isa 40–66 as well. Therefore we must now explore how each segment of Gal 3–4 is enriched by this Isaianic background and determine whether Isa 51–54 has in fact functioned as a framework for Paul’s argument in Gal 3–4. 195 As noted above, De Boer (“Paul’s Quote,” 388) has raised the prospect that “Isa 54.1 provides Paul with the lens through which to read Gen 16–21.” He then lists Gal 1:15-16 (Isa 49:1-6), 4:19 (Isa 45:10), and 6:15 (Isa 43:18-19; 65:17-25) as other places where Isaiah has shaped Galatians. But as we will see here, the connections are even more far-reaching than De Boer realizes.

Synthesis

187

3.3.1 Galatians 3:1-5 – Introducing What Is at Stake Paul introduces the argument of Gal 3:1–5:1 by asserting the superiority of evx avkoh/j pi,stewj over evx e;rgwn no,mou with regard to the reception and ongoing experience of the Spirit.196 If, as we have argued above, avkoh/j pi,stewj is in fact an allusion to the prophet’s question in Isa 53:1, then we might anticipate that Paul’s transformation of the prophet’s question into a description of the basis upon which a person receives and experiences the Spirit has a role in framing the argument of Gal 3:6–5:1. Within its original context, Isa 53:1 relates Israel’s confession (through the voice of the prophet)197 that she failed to believe the message about the Servant; it is as if Israel is looking back and realizing her misperception of the Servant. Contextually, the content of that message would seem to include at least the description of the Servant’s ministry in 53:2-12, but there is an indication that the message extends to the preceding chapter. The key is the parallelism of the following line, where “message” is parallel to the “arm of Yahweh” being revealed. 198 Yahweh’s arm was previously mentioned in 52:10, where it is linked to displaying his salvation before all the ends of the earth. In turn that salvation is linked back to the proclamation of those who bring good news (euvaggelizome,nou), peace, and the proclamation that Zion’s God reigns (52:7). So within the larger context of Isa 53:1, the message that Israel failed to believe concerns not only the person and work of the Servant, but also the announcement of the Isaianic gospel. A similar dynamic is present in the larger context of Gal 3:2, 5. The message that the Galatians heard with faith is none other than Paul’s gospel, which in Gal 3:1 clearly centers on Christ crucified. Christ’s death is described in terms drawn from Isa 53 (Gal 3:13; 4:4-5; cf. also 1:4; 2:20), and is specifically linked to the blessings of salvation being extended to the nations (Gal 3:14). Additional evidence of a link between evx avkoh/j pi,stewj in Gal 3:2, 5 and Isa 53 is that this phrase in linked to the Spirit. As noted above, 196 The Kaqw,j that begins 3:6 (introducing the citation of Gen 15:6) and immediately follows evx avkoh/j pi,stewj in 3:5 makes the connection especially clear. 197 Some argue that it is the nations and kings mentioned in 52:15 who are speaking in 53:1; see, e.g., Henri Cazelles, "Les poèmes du Serviteur," RSR 43 (1955): 5-55, esp. 3437. But a good number of scholars opt for the view posited here; see, e.g., Childs, Isaiah, 413-14; Oswalt, Isaiah 40–66, 381; Koole, Isaiah III, 2:272-76. Oswalt (Isaiah 40– 66, 381) rightly notes that one’s view of who the Servant is influences one’s decision on the identity of the speaker in 53:1, and then notes that the two NT citations of Isa 53:1 (John 12:38; Rom 10:16) appear to understand the passage in this manner. 198 Recall that we have suggested a possible echo of Isa 52:10 in Gal 1:16; see above, 8086.

188


both times this key phrase occurs it is linked to a question regarding the Spirit. Although the Spirit is mentioned explicitly only three times in Gal 3:6–5:1 (3:14; 4:6, 29), in each case Isaianic language is present. Thus the connection between the Spirit and Isa 53:1 in Gal 3:2, 5 further lays the groundwork for Paul’s references to the Spirit in Gal 3:6–5:1, and more importantly prepares the reader for the discussion of the Spirit in Gal 5:16-26, which also has its roots in Isaiah. 199 So by transforming Isaiah’s question into a statement Paul has signaled to his audience that the discussion to follow in 3:6–5:1 has been informed by at least Isa 53:1, and, as our discussion suggests, an even wider context surrounding it.

3.3.2 Galatians 3:6-14 – The Gospel Preached to Abraham The heart of Paul’s presentation of Abraham is found in Gal 3:6-9; this densely packed section is the tree trunk from which the various branches of the argument spread out in Gal 3:10–5:1. Our analysis above has shown that Isa 51:1-8 and 52:7-10 are important nutrients in the scriptural soil that fertilize Paul’s retelling of the Abraham story. We must now explore how these two passages contribute to Paul’s larger argument and how they make their presence known in Gal 3:10–5:1. In our discussion of Isa 51:1-8 in Gal 3:6-9 above, we noted four points of contact: righteousness language, a call to believe in God’s promise, a summons to look to Abraham to encourage present trust, and the inclusion of the Gentiles within God’s saving plan.200 The Isaianic emphasis on righteousness, God’s faithfulness to his promise to Abraham and the inclusion of the Gentiles affords Paul the ideal entry point into the Abraham story to decisively demonstrate the inclusion of the Gentiles within God’s people on the same basis as Abraham himself: faith in the promise. Perhaps most helpful to Paul was the linking of the Abrahamic covenant with the gospel proclaimed in Isaiah 51–54. Few deny the importance of Isa 52:7-10 as a background for Paul’s use 199 Cosgrove argues that the combined questions of Gal 3:2, 5, which focus on the experience of the Spirit, are the interpretive key for chapters 3–4; see Cross and the Spirit, 39-86. Cosgrove’s analysis is particularly insightful regarding the connection between the Spirit and the various themes such as promise, blessing, inheritance, and justification/righteousness. Thus in one respect our analysis supports Cosgrove’s claim regarding the importance of the Spirit in Gal 3–4. Our distinctive contribution on this matter is to identify the Isaianic descriptions of the Spirit and his work in the Messianic age, which Cosgrove at bests hints at in scattered references. 200 See above, 136-40.

Synthesis

189

of euvaggeli,zomai / euvagge,lion,201 but what is often overlooked is the explicit linking of the term within the context of Isa 51–54 to the fulfillment of the promise to Abraham. In Isa 51:1-3 the promise to bless and multiply Abraham despite his seemingly impossible circumstances is directly linked to God’s comparably “impossible” promise to comfort Zion.202 This comfort is described in terms of comforting the waste places, making the wilderness like Eden and the desert like the garden of Yahweh; the result is joy, gladness, thanksgiving and song in restored Zion. Similar terms are then used in Isa 52:7-10 to explicate the good news being proclaimed: the waste places of Zion break forth into singing because Yahweh has comforted his people (52:9). 203 A further link between the two passages is the extension of Yahweh’s salvation to the Gentiles; in 51:4-5 Yahweh’s justice is established as a light to the peoples, whereas in 52:10 all the ends of the earth will see Yahweh’s salvation.204 Thus in linking righteousness, the promise to Abraham, blessing to the Gentiles and the “gospel” Paul is merely following the connections present within Isa 51–54 itself. He is not twisting the text to make it conform to his purpose; instead he is walking in the steps of Isaiah. Yet because of his place within redemptive history, Paul is now able to connect the Christ-event to Isaiah’s promises. By doing so Paul claims that the promise to Abraham and the restoration of Zion have both found their fulfillment in the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus. Therefore all who are identified with Christ by faith are blessed (Gal 3:9), by which Paul means they are reckoned righteous, considered Abraham’s children, and citizens of the restored, heavenly Jerusalem. But Paul must still explain how those who are identified with Christ by faith can be reckoned righteous. After all, the curse of the Law rests upon all who fail to do all that is contained in the Law. 205 But 201 See our discussion above, 67-70. 202 The connection is stronger in the MT (on account of the conjunction yKi) than in the LXX (kai,), but even with the simple kai, the context makes the link clear. 203 See the various connections noted throughout the exegesis of Koole, Isaiah III, 2:23243, as well as Motyer, Prophecy, 419-20. 204 In Isa 52:10 the fate of the Gentiles is unclear; the MT and LXX (minus the possessive pronoun) both say only that the nations “will see the salvation of our God.” Isaiah 51:4-5 is clearer, claiming that the nations will hope in Yahweh’s arm. Paul could easily have interpreted 52:10 in light of 51:4-5, or simply seen the ambiguity through his conviction that the Gentiles were included within the saving scope of God. 205 Earlier we contended that when Paul says “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law” (Gal 3:13) he has both Jews and Gentiles in view (see above, 141 n. 65). But that conclusion raises a potential difficulty: in what sense can Gentiles be regarded as being under the curse of the Law? Admittedly, Paul does not directly answer this question in Galatians. But he does address a similar issue in Rom 2:12-16. There Paul ar-

190


as the suffering Servant Christ became a curse on “our” behalf; as such he is the means by which those under the curse of the Law may receive the blessing of Abraham.206 As we noted above, within Isa 51–54 the vicarious suffering and death of the Servant in Isa 53 functions as the means by which sinful and exiled Israel is brought back to Yahweh. His death is also seen as the way in which Yahweh will both fulfill his promise to bless and multiply Abraham (cp. 51:1-3 with 53:10-12) and comfort Zion (this is implied by the call to rejoice in Isa 54:1ff. that follows Isa 53). Therefore just as the death of the Servant in Isa 53 functions as the decisive act in which Yahweh deals with the sin of his people and enables the blessing of Abraham and the comforting of Zion, so too Paul places the death of Christ at the center of God’s redemptive act. He too sees Jesus’ death as dealing with the curse brought about by the Law and the means by which God can unleash the blessing of Abraham to those identified with the Servant. The implication to be drawn is that Paul regards the death of Jesus as the decisive act of God whereby he deals with the sin of his people (defined as those identified with Christ by faith) and unleashes the blessing of Abraham to all who believe, a blessing that finds its culmination in the gift of the Spirit.

gues that Gentiles who sin without the law perish without the Law (2:12) and that “whenever Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively [fu,sei] the things of the Law [ta. tou/ no,mou], these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts” (2:14-15). Cp. the similar conclusion of Bruce — “The pronoun ‘us’ in [Gal 3:13] denotes not only Jewish believers, who were directly under Law, but Gentile believers also, whose conscience, accusing or excusing them, bore witness to their inward knowledge of what the Law required”; see F. F. Bruce, "The Curse of the Law," in Paul and Paulinism: Essays in Honour of C.K. Barrett (ed. Morna D. Hooker and S. G. Wilson; London: SPCK, 1982), 2736, quote from 33. From this passage in Romans, then, it is not a significant step to the idea that Paul considered Gentiles to be under the curse of the Law. After all, Gal 3:10-14 emphasizes that “whosoever [{Osoi]” relies on doing the Law, regardless of ethnicity, are under a curse, for no one is able “to do all [pa/sin] that is written in the book of the Law.” For an excellent discussion of the relationship between Gal 3:10-14 and Rom 1:18–2:29 and the ramifications for Paul’s view of the Law, see especially Das, Paul, 171-91. 206 Though not explicitly stated here, Paul clearly implies that faith in Christ identifies one with him in his death AND his resurrection to new life. Paul states this as his own experience in 2:19-20, where he claims not only to be crucified with Christ but also that Christ now lives in him. A similar idea may be behind 4:19, where Paul speaks of his desire for Christ (by implication the risen Christ) to be formed in/among the Galatians.

Synthesis

191

3.3.3 Galatians 3:15-29 – The Servant/Seed Becomes a Curse to Bless the Gentiles Expanding upon the foundation laid in Gal 3:6-14, Paul now moves to spell out the underlying logic of how those identified with Christ by faith receive the blessing of Abraham. Central to his purpose is the convergence of three key ideas: blessing, seed, and the gift of the Spirit. Scholars have long noted that the Spirit is mentioned nowhere in Genesis as part of the promise to Abraham, but have differed on explaining the basis on which Paul associates the two. 207 As noted above, these three ideas are found closely conjoined in Isa 44:3-5, a passage where Yahweh assures his people of their eventual restoration. He promises to pour out his Spirit on Jacob/Israel’s seed, which is paralleled in the following line with his blessing on their descendants. Within that larger context it should be noted that Jacob/Israel is called “my servant” (44:1), which means that Yahweh here is promising to pour out his Spirit/blessing upon the seed of the servant when he restores his people. The result produced in God’s people (44:4-5) is twofold: they will see abundant growth (44:4) and be identified by Yahweh’s name (44:5). Isaiah has combined the promise of the Spirit with the blessing promised to Abraham and presented them together as the restoration hope for God’s people. A similar logic is at work in Galatians. Having just presented Christ as the Servant (Gal 3:13), Paul now refers to Christ as the seed to whom the promise was made (3:16). In other words Christ was the one who first received the blessing promised to Abraham, which within the context is equated with receiving the Spirit.208 Therefore Paul is arguing 207 Recourse is often made to theological syllogisms; two examples will suffice. Betz argues that: (a) the Galatians received the Spirit by faith (3:2, 5); (b) the blessing of Abraham is received by faith (3:9), therefore (c) the Spirit = the blessing of Abraham (Galatians, 152-53). Dunn moves from the coming of the Spirit as the fulfillment of the hope for the age to come (anchored in texts such as Isa 32:15; 44:3; 59:21; Ezek 11:19; 36:26-27; 37:1-14; 39:29; Joel 2:28-29) to the Galatians’ present experience of the Spirit (Gal 3:2, 5), and argues that the presence of the Spirit indicates the inauguration of the new age. Since the new age is here, the Abrahamic covenant must be fulfilled as well (Galatians, 180). Much closer to the mark is Hays, who, after singling out Isa 44:3 as important for Gal 3:14, says “the experience of the Spirit in the church is a sign that God’s eschatological restoration of Israel has begun. The fact that Gentiles such as the Galatians have also experienced this outpouring of the Spirit is consistent with the prophetic vision, which in turn was already ‘pre-proclaimed’ in the promise to Abraham (vv. 6-9)” (“Galatians,” 261). 208 Stating at what point Paul believed that Jesus “received” the Spirit would be nothing more than speculation, though an obvious point to consider would be Jesus’ baptism. If that is the case, the question would then have to be asked if there is any im-

192


that God’s promise to pour out his Spirit upon the seed of his servant in fulfillment of his promise to bless Abraham, encapsulated so succinctly in Isa 44:1-5, has now come in Christ.209 Paul places a great deal of significance on the singular nature of the seed in Gal 3:16. Although observing that there is warrant for such a singular reading within the Gen 17:15-19, we have argued that Isa 41:8 must also be taken into account. The equation there of “Israel my servant” and “seed of Abraham” may have helped lead Paul to the connection between Christ the Servant and Christ the seed of Abraham. Just as Paul seems to understand Jesus as THE Servant while at the same time recognizing himself and other believers as servants of Yahweh as well,210 so too he regards Christ as THE seed of Abraham while contending that all who are identified with Christ are also the seed of Abraham.211 This convergence of the Servant and seed themes runs through Isa 40–55, culminating in the Servant suffering vicariously for sin yet seeing his seed (Isa 53:10), who inherit the nations (Isa 54:3). Paul appears to have observed this movement within Isa 40–55 and found it helpful in explaining his gospel in a way that rejects his opponents’ insistence upon Torah-compliance. One final thread remains to be sewn — the combination of the themes covenant, promise, seed, and inheritance (Gal 3:15-18). There should be little doubt that Gen 15 played an important role for Paul here, since that is the only chapter where these four words appear in close proximity in the LXX of Genesis. Furthermore, the fact that Paul began this discussion with a citation of Gen 15:6 makes it clear that he plied connection within Gal 3 itself between the gift of the Spirit and baptism, which is discussed in 3:27-29. 209 The significance of Isa 44:1-5 may even be seen in the eventual development of two additional themes present there that are subsequently developed in Galatians. First, the description of the Spirit in Isa 44:3-4 speaks of producing growth in/among God’s people by using botanical imagery. In Gal 5:22-26 Paul goes on to describe the work of the Spirit in/among them in similar, albeit different, botanical language. Second, the seed who receive the blessing/Spirit are said in Isa 44:5 to belong to the Lord and called Israel. Galatians 3:26-29 strongly emphasizes that those who believe in Christ are “of Christ” and are referred to in 6:16 as “the Israel of God.” Paul’s development of these two additional ideas later in Galatians suggests that he may have taken his cue from Isa 44:1-5. Admittedly these two themes are found numerous places elsewhere in the OT. We at the least may recognize the similarities in Galatians as consistent with the picture that emerges from Isa 44:1-5. 210 See above, 106-22. 211 Additional confirmation may also be found in the observation of Laato (Servant of YHWH, 74) that Isa 41:8-13 contains traces of both the Abraham tradition and royal ideology. If the Servant of Isa 40-55 is understood as a royal figure, we may have evidence within Isaiah itself of Paul’s combination of the singular seed of Abraham and the singular Servant.

Synthesis

193

has Gen 15 in view. But we have also argued that Isa 54:3-10 likely contributed to Paul’s argument. Within Isa 40–55, chapter 54 functions as a song that celebrates the redemption accomplished by the Servant (Isa 53), and does so by incorporating many of the themes expressed in Isa 40–53. Isaiah 54:3-10 links the fulfillment of these promises to the “covenant of peace,” a connection that Paul may have considered perfectly suited for his purposes in Galatians. 212 The effect is to claim that with the advent of Christ the seed/Servant, this covenant of peace (including the notions of promise, seed, and inheritance) has now been established with Christ and those identified with him.213 This conclusion is further solidified when one notes that Paul concludes Galatians with an allusion to Isa 54:10 in 6:16. Given the paucity of explicit allusions and echoes in Gal 3:17-29 one might be inclined to conclude that these verses are devoid of Isaianic influence. Such a conclusion, however, would be misguided. First, 3:1724 Paul addresses the place of the Law within God’s redemptive plan, a natural question that is raised by his prioritization of the Abrahamic covenant. Although he is not dependent upon Isaiah for his argument in 3:17-24, we must recall that the question arises because in his presentation of his (Isaianic) gospel he appears to ignore the Law. 214 Second, once he has finished discussing the place of the Law and returns to the main thrust of his argument in 3:26-29 Paul immediately begins to take up the Isaianic themes of sons, seed, heirs and promise.

3.3.4 Galatians 4:1-7 – The Servant/Seed and the New Exodus In agreement with a growing number of scholars we have argued that exodus typology underlies Gal 4:1-7. In distinction from these scholars, however, we have argued that Paul draws specifically on new exodus themes present in Isa 40–55: new creation, the role of the Servant, and the seed of Abraham. Although the phrase “new creation” does not occur until Gal 6:15, the various motifs it refers to permeate Galatians, and Gal 4:1-7 is not exempt. Based on the explicit connection of the cross to “new creation” in Gal 6:15, Paul encourages the reader to associate the previous references to Jesus’ death with new creation as well. Furthermore, the blessings of sonship and the bestowal of the Spirit are 212 See our discussion of Gal 6:16 below, 236-38. 213 We may also note that when Paul quotes Isa 54:1 in Gal 4:27 he does so in the context of speaking of two “covenants.” 214 See above, 97-100, where we suggested a similar law-free emphasis in Isaiah 40–66.

194


two of the key elements of the inheritance promised to God’s people in the new creation.215 Paul is thus arguing that at the cross the new exodus that would usher in a new creation has begun, and the proof is that the promised inheritance of sonship and the Spirit have already been experienced by the Galatians. 216 The link between new exodus and new creation, focused on the inheritance of sonship and the Spirit and resulting in freedom from slavery, also anticipates the major theme(s) of Galatians 5. Paul concludes the argument of 3:1–5:1 with the declaration of the believer’s freedom, and then goes on to describe what freedom in Christ looks like in 5:2– 6:10. In Gal 4:7 Paul emphasizes that the believer is no longer a slave but a son and an heir, thus implying that the son/heir is free. By implicitly stressing the freedom of the believer in the climax of 4:1-7, Paul prepares the way for the culmination of his argument in 4:21–5:1 that the Galatians have been born into freedom. As such, Gal 4:1-7 not only acts as a concise summary of his argument from 3:6-29, but also as an anticipation of Paul’s final destination in 4:21–5:1. Thus the freedom from slavery promised in the Isaianic new exodus, according to Paul, has now been ushered in by God sending the Son and the Spirit of his Son.217 This line of reasoning is further advanced by recognizing the key role that Paul assigns to Jesus in bringing about the new exodus, a role played by the Servant in Isa 40–55.218 Within Isa 40–55, the vicarious death of the Servant is the act by which the new exodus is undertaken, freeing the captives to return to Zion and experience Yahweh’s blessing.

215 Paul links these two concepts to new creation language most clearly in Rom 8:20-23. There he claims that believers groan just like creation for the consummation of God’s redemptive purpose, which entails the revelation of the “sons of God,” and is a result of the first-fruits experience of the Spirit. 216 Although we cannot be certain, if Jewish nationalistic pressures contributed to the desire of Paul’s opponents to be circumcised, we can surmise an additional implication of Paul’s argument. The opponents may have been promoting circumcision out of a desire to placate the rising tide of Jewish nationalism, which around this time was building to a crescendo that would eventually culminate in the Jewish War. If Paul’s opponents believed that the long promised new exodus was still to come, obedience to the Law was a fitting way to prepare for that new exodus. In contrast to this, Paul is arguing that the new exodus has already taken place at the cross, and those who are identified with Christ by faith already are taking part in the new exodus inheritance of sonship and the Spirit; see discussion in R. Longenecker, Galatians, lxxxix-c, and literature cited there. 217 Admittedly this conclusion is only implied in Gal 4:1-7, whereas in 4:21–5:1 it is explicitly stated and then explained in 5:2–6:10. 218 See above, 164-66, for the close parallels between 4:4-6 and 3:13-14 and their mutual dependence on Isa 53.

Synthesis

195

Paul, now for the fourth time in Galatians,219 uses language from Isa 53 to describe the work of Jesus, and when we compare this occurrence with the previous three we can see the new creation motifs. In Gal 1:4 Paul links Christ’s death to delivering the believer from the present evil age, with the implication that they have been transferred into the “age to come.” This dualistic language is connected with new creation within Second Temple Judaism, and there is no reason to doubt Paul is making a similar connection.220 Paul personalized the second occurrence in Gal 2:20, noting that Christ gave himself for Paul and that Paul was crucified with Christ. So transformative was this event that he can even say that it is no longer he who lives, but Christ in him. Given the explicit link between the cross and new creation in Gal 6:15, there is every reason to think of Gal 2:19-20 as Paul’s personal experience of new creation. Finally, in Gal 3:13 Christ’s death redeems the believer from the curse of the Law. In our discussion we noted that in Isa 53 the Servant is presented as vicariously experiencing the curse of the Law on behalf of his people. But we should also note that within Isa 40–66 the death of the Servant deals not only with the curse of the Law but the curse of Eden as well. The portrayal of the new creation, culminating in Isa 65:17-25 and 66:22-23, envisions the reversal of the curse from the Garden.221 If then the death of the Servant in Isa 40–66 is linked to the reversal of not only the curse of the Law but the curse from Eden, we should not be surprised if a similar line of thought is evident in Galatians.222 That Paul does have such a link in mind is at least suggested 219 Cp. 1:4; 2:20; 3:13 220 See references and brief discussion in Ciampa, Presence and Function, 61 n. 103. 221 This reversal can perhaps best be seen in Isa 51:3, where the promised restoration is pictured as a restored Eden. Note also that Rev 21–22, a description of the new creation that depends heavily on Isaiah, explicitly claims that the curse of Eden will be removed (22:3). 222 A further indication that Paul may have linked the curse of the Law with the curse from Eden here in Galatians is the equation of the Law with the “elementals” in 4:910. Paul seems to regard the Mosaic Law as a specific example of the much larger category of “elementals” that compose the present evil age, but are done away with in the Messianic age/new creation. In this sense the curse of the Law is also then a specific manifestation of the curse from Eden; Christ in his death has done away with not only the curse of the Law but the larger category of the curse from Eden as well. Although he does not explicitly link his discussion to the notion of curse, Beale similarly claims that in associating the Law and the elementals Paul argues that since “Christ has come . . . and has launched a new cosmos, the old cosmos has begun to be destroyed and the new is in place . . . . The elements of divisiveness which sustained the sinful structure of the old world have been decisively decimated by Christ and He has replaced them by Himself as the only foundational pillar of the new world. This is what Galatians 6:14-16 has in mind”; see Gregory K. Beale, "The Eschatological Conception of New Testament Theology," in Eschatology in Bible & Theology:

196


by the inseparable link between the cross and new creation in Gal 6:1415, and hinted at in Gal 4:1-7 in connection with the Isaianic new exodus. Finally, we should also note that within the larger context of Galatians, the sons referred to in 4:7 are not just any sons, but specifically Abrahamic seed. The Isaianic new exodus has produced sons of Abraham, heirs according to the promise (cp. 3:29; 4:7, 23-31). Paul contends that the new exodus has in fact taken place through the death of Christ and puts forward the formation of the church as Abrahamic sons as evidence for this claim. Again it would seem that Paul has taken his cue for merging the Abrahamic covenant with the hope of a new exodus from Isaiah, and identified the church (Jew and Gentile alike) as the heirs of these combined promises. Thus we see that in Gal 4:1-7 Paul uses Isaianic new exodus imagery to vividly portray Christ’s death as the defining act that inaugurated the new creation and brought into existence the seed of Abraham who inherit the Spirit and freedom. If Gal 4:1-7 functions as a succinct summary of 3:6-29, then we have further confirmation of the proposed influence of Isa 51–54 on that section.223 Furthermore, since 4:1-7 clearly anticipates the climax of 4:21–5:1, we have additional evidence as to the importance of Isa 51–54 for the entirety of 3:1–5:1. Finally, the fact that Paul spends 5:2–6:10 describing the freedom purchased by the death of the Servant suggests that we should be alert to Isaianic influence there as well. But confirmation of that must await the next chapter.

3.3.5 Galatians 4:8-20 – Paul’s Labor in the Gospel Without question these thirteen verses have the fewest traces of Isaianic influence in all of Gal 3–4. The reason is that Paul makes an appeal in these verses on a largely personal level. He reminds the Galatians of their initial reception of Paul and his gospel (referring to it as a “blessing”) and calls them to become like Paul. But even within this section we found two places where Paul’s language is dependent upon Isaiah, both of which refer to his apostolic ministry. Returning to a theme introduced in Gal 2:2, Paul expresses concern that he has labored in vain over the Galatians. As the Servant through whom Christ fulfills his Evangelical Essays at the Dawn of a New Millennium (ed. K. E. Brower and M. W. Elliott; Downers Grove: IVP, 1997), 11-52, quote from 37 (emphasis mine). 223 See also Wilder, Echoes, 86-104. He argues that the exodus language is present from at least 3:15-29.

Synthesis

197

mission of being a light to the nations, Paul is mindful of the words of the Servant in Isa 49:4, which express the perception that the Servant’s work might be in vain. Desperate to prevent that from happening, Paul had traveled to Jerusalem to ensure that his law-free gospel was recognized by the authorities of the church (Gal 2:2). The result was positive, but soon afterwards the events in Antioch and now in Galatia had led Paul to once again fear that his labor had been in vain. Just as he had defended the freedom of the gospel in Jerusalem and Antioch, Paul must now do so in Galatia as well; otherwise his labor might prove vain. Paul’s personal appeal climaxes in 4:19 when he claims that he is once again experiencing labor pains in his effort to see Christ formed in/among the Galatians. By appropriating the language of Isa 45:7-11 Paul provocatively presents himself as the one through whom the Galatians were born into the people of God. And now that they are in danger of abandoning Paul’s gospel for another, he must once again experience the birth pangs necessary to ensure the Galatians experience the fullness of the Messianic age ushered in by Christ. And if one asks what Paul means by Christ being formed in/among (evn) the Galatians, one need look no further than his autobiographical statement in 2:19-20 of being crucified with Christ and Christ living in (evn) him.224 Even in making his personal appeal to the Galatians Paul cannot help but speak in the language of Isaiah to refer to his apostolic ministry, much as he did in Gal 1–2. But Paul’s chosen metaphor does more than simply use the imagery of Isaiah to make a point; it also anticipates the climax of his argument in 4:21–5:1. As such an echo of Isa 51:1-2 seems likely, in that Paul is calling the Galatians to look back to his initial gospel proclamation as a means of exhorting them to show they are in fact Abraham’s seed. Just as the reference to Sarah giving birth to Zion in Isa 51:1-3 prepares the way for the barren woman to rejoice in 54:1ff, so too Paul’s reference to himself in labor pains (4:19) paves the way for the daring trope of 4:21– 5:1 that climaxes in the very same summons of Isa 54:1.

3.3.6 Galatians 4:21 – 5:1 –Rejoice in the Freedom the Servant Bought The cumulative force of our argument thus far, in our estimation, would be enough to establish that Paul has drawn heavily from Isaiah 224 See the similar conclusion of Gaventa, “Maternity,” 189-201.

198


40–55 (and in particular chs. 51–54) throughout chapters 3–4, even if 4:21–5:1 did not exist. Admittedly to this point the allusions/echoes have largely remained in the background, but here in 4:21–5:1 these chapters of Isaiah break forth into the open for all to see in the quotation of Isa 54:1 in Gal 4:27. The central role this citation plays is not limited to the trope of 4:21–5:1; rather it exerts a hermeneutical control over the entirety of 3:1–5:1.225 Furthermore, the citation of Isa 54:1 reveals the destination for which Paul set out in 3:1; i.e., that all who believe in Christ are part of Abraham’s seed, full heirs of the promise, recipients of the Spirit, and freed from the Law. Or, as Paul will succinctly summarize in 6:15, they are participants in the new creation. The central event that inaugurated this new creation was the death and resurrection of Christ, in which believers participate through faith in him. They too become children of the heavenly Jerusalem, born into the freedom of the Messianic age. If in fact Gal 4:21–5:1 is the climax towards which Paul has been building from at least 3:1, we should be able to revisit Gal 3:1–4:20 and observe how key elements of 4:21–5:1 are anticipated or how aspects of 3:1–4:20 find their culmination in 4:21–5:1. We begin in 4:21 with Paul’s address to his opponents and their sympathizers as “those wanting to be under Law [oi` u`po. no,mon qe,lontej ei=nai].” In 3:10 Paul argues that those identified by works of Law are u`po. kata,ran, and then cements the relationship between u`po, no,mon and u`po. kata,ran in 3:13 by insisting that Christ redeems believers evk th/j kata,raj tou/ no,mou. Later in 3:23 Paul refers to being held in custody u`po. no,mon until faith came, a status he further describes as u`po. paidagwgo,n (3:25), u`po. evpitro,pouj . . . kai. oivkono,mouj (4:2) and u`po. ta. stoicei/a tou/ ko,smou (4:3).226 Paul then repeats his assertion that Christ redeems those u`po. no,mon (4:5) as one who was born u`po. no,mon (4:4).227 Thus when Paul addresses those who want to be u`po. no,mon in 4:21, it this network of negative associations from 3:1-4:20 that Paul is drawing upon; he is in effect saying, “If after all of these negative descriptions of being u`po. no,mon you still want to pursue the Law, let me now advance my final argument against such lunacy.” This final argument begins with Paul’s implicit command to listen to the Law (4:21). In one sense he has already called the Galatians to do so by citing Gen 15:6 (3:6), Gen 12:3/18:18 (3:8), Deut 27:26 (3:10), Lev 225 Again, as De Boer (“Paul’s Quotation,” 388-89) has suggested. 226 Note also the probable link to u`po. a`marti,an in 3:22. 227 For an interesting discussion of the relationship of these u`po, clauses to each other and Paul’s view of the Law, see Todd A. Wilson, "'Under Law' in Galatians: A Pauline Theological Abbreviation," JTS 56 (2005): 362-92; for critique of his view, see below 241 n. 123.

Synthesis

199

18:5 (3:12), and Deut 21:23 (3:13). But in 4:22–5:1 it becomes clear that Paul now wants the Galatians to explicitly consider the larger context of Gen 16–21. Thus in one sense Paul moves from a discussion in 3:1–4:7 centered on Gen 12:3 (+ 18:18) and 15:6 to an argument in 4:21–5:1 based more broadly on Gen 16–21; but the common feature to both is that Paul interprets them through the lenses of Isa 51–54. In fact, as the discussion that follows will show, 4:21–5:1 succinctly summarizes the argument of 3:1–4:20 in a powerful way. Paul introduces his retelling of Gen 16–21 by stating that Abraham had two sons, which echoes his contention in 3:7 that those who are evk pi,stewj are sons of Abraham. In fact, one can plausibly argue that the burden of Paul’s argument in 3:6–4:7 is to demonstrate who the sons of Abraham truly are (cf. 3:26, 29; 4:5-7). But Paul must now place his contention that believers in Christ are the true sons of Abraham back within the context of Gen 16–21 and explain “who” the other son is. At this point Paul advances the argument from that of 3:6–4:20 by introducing the respective mothers of the sons, but he does so in conceptual terms that he has already emphasized: slave and free. This contrast between slavery and freedom begins in earnest in 3:23 and continues through 4:11.228 Before faith came “we” were in custody under the Law, which was a tutor (paidagwgo,j) until the coming of Christ (3:23-25). The imagery of the tutor is then further developed in 4:1-7 and forms the basis of the contrast between being a minor under supervision and a son with the full privileges of adoption (primary among them the Spirit). The “punch line” of 4:1-7 is stated in terms of the contrast between slavery and sonship, a contrast that is more fully developed in 4:21–5:1 between slavery and freedom. So in 4:21–5:1 Paul takes this contrast between slavery/freedom and develops it by linking each to a specific son and mother. He then goes on to associate slavery and freedom with two different covenants (du,o diaqh/kai)229 and eventually two different Jerusalems (nu/n VIerousalh,m . . . a;nw VIerousalh,m).230 But

228 While it is true that the word evleu,qeroj only occurs in 3:28, one can hardly deny that the central contrast in 3:23–4:11 is that between slavery/custody and freedom. Contextually, the statement “neither slave nor free” (3:28) seems to refer more to potential social distinctions within the people of God rather than a contrast between slavery under the Law and freedom in Christ, though it may on a secondary level tap into the underlying slavery/freedom contrast. 229 The use of diaqh,kh here in 4:24 points back to the two references in 3:15, 17, where the term is clearly associated with evpaggeli,a. 230 The reference to the present Jerusalem also provides a link back to Paul’s autobiographical narrative in chs. 1–2. R. Longenecker (Galatians, 213) suggests that difference in spelling between 1:17, 18; 2:1 (~Ieroso,luma) and in 4:25-26 (VIerousalh,m) is that

200


the fundamental contrast remains the distinction between slavery and freedom, a point demonstrated by the fact that the argument culminates in 5:1 with the emphatic conclusion that Christ freed believers for freedom (Th/| evleuqeri,a| h`ma/j Cristo.j hvleuqe,rwsen).231 As a result, returning to slavery should be unthinkable. An additional contrast that is largely implicit in 3:1–4:20 breaks to the surface in 4:21–5:1 — flesh vs. promise/Spirit. While it is true that sa,rx occurs only once in Gal 3–4 (3:4) previous to 4:23, the occurrence there does contrast sa,rx with pneu/ma. Perhaps even more importantly, within its context sa,rx is aligned with evx e;rgwn no,mou whereas pneu/ma is associated with evx avkoh/j pi,stewj. This alignment corresponds to 4:21– 5:1, where sa,rx is placed in the same column as Hagar/slavery/Ishmael and pneu/ma with Sarah/freedom/Isaac. A further indication of the summary nature of 4:21–5:1 is found in the similar interchange between Spirit and promise in 3:1–4:20. In 3:14 promise and Spirit are brought together in the clause i[na th.n evpaggeli,an tou/ pneu,matoj la,bwmen dia. th/j pi,stewj. Regardless of the precise nuance of the genitive tou/ pneu,matoj,232 the effect is to inseparably bind promise and Spirit together in Gal 3:1– 4:20. Within the execution of the argument in 3:6–4:20 the predominant term is evpaggeli,a, occurring eight times compared to just two references

the former is a strictly geographical reference, whereas the latter emphasizes the religious significance of the city. 231 The exact force of the dative is disputed. One possibility is an instrumental or causal sense, but this sense demands an implied h-| (present in D and other manuscripts, probably as a result of “correcting” the text); see J. B. Lightfoot, St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians (London: MacMillan, 1896), 200-2. While not impossible, a better solution is available. The formula th/| evleuqeri,a| was used in manumission records to indicate destination or purpose; see Adolf Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East: The New Testament Illustrated by Recently Discovered Texts of the Graeco-Roman World (New York: George H. Doran Company, 1927), 321-28. Regarding the importance of the first clause in Gal 5:1, Dunn (Galatians, 262) claims, “In these words Paul sums up the whole argument of iii.1-iv.11 — both the recognition (now) that the life he had previously lived ‘within Judaism’ (i.13-14) was an immature and unnecessarily restricted one (iii.23-4), and the sense of liberation which he personally had experienced through his conversion and which he wanted his converts to experience for themselves in full measure, in contrast to their previous slavery (iv.8-9).” 232 The two most likely options are an attributed genitive (i.e., “promised Spirit”) or epexegetical (“the promise that is the Spirit”). For those seeing an attributed genitive, see, e.g., Witherington, Grace in Galatia, 240; Wisdom, Blessing for the Nations, 198. For the epexegetical genitive, see Hansen, Abraham in Galatians, 126; Cosgrove, Cross and the Spirit, 50. In either case the emphasis is placed on the Spirit as at least the defining characteristic of the promise, though one must be careful not to collapse the entirety of the promise into reception of the Spirit, since Abraham is introduced in 3:6 in reference to justification; cf. the similar conclusion of Silva, Interpreting Galatians, 177 n. 24.

Synthesis

201

to pneu/ma.233 However, in 3:1-5, where Paul is framing the argument of Gal 3–4, pneu/ma occurs three times, which has the effect of placing the argument of 3:6–4:20 within the context of how the Spirit is received both initially and progressively. Thus the contrast between Spirit and flesh in Gal 4:29 ties 4:22–5:1 back to the introduction of the argument in 3:1-5, and further demonstrates that Gal 4:21–5:1 is the destination for which Paul sets out in 3:1-5.234 Although not exhaustive, 235 this analysis of connections between 4:21–5:1 is enough to demonstrate that far from being an afterthought, the trope of 4:21–5:1 is where Paul is headed from at least 3:1. The prominent themes of being under the Law, listening to the Law, sons of Abraham, slavery vs. freedom and flesh vs. promise/Spirit pervade Gal 3:1–4:20; in the trope of 4:21–5:1 these themes are succinctly woven together in a dramatic retelling of Gen 16–21 mediated through the lens of Isa 54:1.236 Since then the central themes of 3:1–4:20 find their culmination in the trope of 4:21–5:1, where Isa 54:1 plays the decisive hermeneutical function, our argument that Gal 3:1–4:20 is also dependent on Isa 51–54 finds significant confirmation.237

233 Note also the concepts that evpaggeli,a is explicitly associated with in 3:1–4:20 — Spirit (3:14), seed (3:16), inheritance/heir (3:18, 29) and faith (3:22); all of these are central motifs in the argument. Furthermore, Paul feels compelled to explain how Law relates to promise (3:17, 21), a sure sign of the importance of promise for his case. 234 The contrast between flesh and Spirit also points forwards to 5:16-26, but discussion of that must await the next chapter. 235 Further possible connections include the verb sustoice,w in 4:25 (cp. ta. stoicei/a in 4:3, 9), the verb wvdi,nw in 4:27 (cp. 4:19 and the discussion above on 168-73) and the reference to persecution (diw,kw) (cp. tosau/ta evpa,qete eivkh/|È in 3:4). 236 Perhaps this is the significance of a[tina, evstin avllhgorou,mena in 4:24; Paul is signaling the reader that he is using Isa 54:1 to re-read Gen 16–21; for a similar suggestion, see now Joel Willitts, "Isa 54,1 in Gal 4,24b-27: Reading Genesis in Light of Isaiah," ZNW 96 (2005): 188-210, and especially Di Mattei, “Paul’s Allegory,” 102-114. Di Mattei surveys the Greco-Roman and Jewish background of the term avllhgore,w and then suggests that Isa 54:1 provides the “hermeneutical key to unlocking Paul’s allegorical exposition of the narrative of Gen 16–17” (114). Whether such a move can be traced to a haftarah liturgical reading from Paul’s time, as Di Mattei claims, remains uncertain. 237 Here we may also note the observation of Koole (Isaiah III, 2:352), who after noting that Isa 54:1 must be connected to the patriarchal promise of seed as numerous as the sand on the seashore (Gen 22:17; 32:13) concludes that in Isa 54:1 “the old promise is fulfilled, 44:1-5; 49:14-21; 51:1-3, and this can now be attributed to the work of the Servant” (emphasis mine). The fact that Koole identifies several of the same passages we have argued were significant for Paul in his theological argumentation here in Galatians 3–4 adds further support to our conclusion here.

202


3.3.7 Conclusion We began our synthesis of Isaianic influence in Gal 3–4 by raising the possibility that Isa 51:1-8 and 54:1 serve as bookends for Paul’s argument in Gal 3:1–5:1. Our analysis has confirmed that these texts do in fact perform this hermeneutical function. Paul also alludes to or echoes several passages between the two book-ends, including Isa 51:9-10; 52:7-10, 11-12; 52:13–53:12; 54:1-10. But he does not restrict himself to Isa 51–54; Paul also draws from Isa 41:8, 17-20; 43:16-21; 44:3-5; 45:7-11; 49:4; 61:7-10. As a result, we conclude that Paul uses Isa 51–54 as a framework for his argument in Gal 3–4 and draws upon other Isaianic texts where necessary to enrich his case.238 On a theological level Paul argues that Isaiah’s gospel of blessing to Abraham’s seed and restoration of Zion has now been fulfilled in the death/resurrection of Jesus and the formation of the eschatological people of God, composed of all (Jew and Gentile alike) who are united to Christ by faith. Rhetorically, Paul’s framework use of Isa 51–54 has a dual effect. It reassures the Galatians that they are in fact full heirs and sons of Abraham, citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem. At the same time, Paul is able to rebuke his opponents’ over-realized continuity and refute their scriptural arguments for the necessity of Torah-obedience exemplified by circumcision.

3.4 Summary and Conclusions Summary and Conclusions Our analysis of Isaianic influence in Galatians 3–4 has shown that Paul frames his argument largely within the parameters provided by Isa 51– 54. The echo of Isa 51:1-8 in Gal 3:6-9 and the citation of Isa 54:1 in Gal 4:27 function as bookends, and a number of allusions and echoes in between demonstrate the significance of Isa 51–54 for Paul’s explanation of the gospel in Gal 3–4. The citation of Isa 54:1 in Gal 4:27 is particularly important, for it signals to the reader that not only the trope of Gal 4:21–5:1 hinges upon it, but the totality of Gal 3–4 as well. Isaiah 51–54 supplied Paul with the necessary lenses to read the Abraham narrative in Genesis in a manner that supports his contention that Christ is the fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant and all (whether Jew or Gentile) who are united to him by faith are full heirs/sons of 238 For a similar phenomena, see G. K. Beale, The Use of Daniel in Jewish Apocalyptic Literature and in the Revelation of St. John (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1984), 178-202, 313-20; idem, John’s Use of the Old Testament, 75-93.

Summary and Conclusions

203

Abraham. The decisive evidence is their reception of the Spirit and ongoing experience of the Spirit. The result is a distinctively Isaianic presentation of the gospel in which the death of the Servant is God’s definitive act of new creation that brings into existence Abraham’s true seed, who are at the same time heavenly Jerusalem’s long-promised sons living in the freedom of the Spirit and no longer in slavery to the Law.

Chapter 4

Freeing the Servant’s Family in Galatians 5–6: Paul’s “Isaianic” Explanation of the Freedom of the Servant’s Family Freeing the Servant’s Family

4.1 Overview of the Argument in Galatians 5–6 Overview of the Argument in Galatians 5–6 The final two chapters of Galatians are centered upon Paul’s attempt to describe how the citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem are to live out their freedom in Christ.1 Confident he has established the scriptural footing for his insistence upon the inability of the Law to make one right with God or govern one’s relationships within the church, Paul now seeks to provide guidance for the Galatians by putting forward the work of the Spirit and the Law of Christ. Paul must not only convince the Galatians that his understanding of the gospel is more faithful to the OT scriptures than that of his opponents; he must also demonstrate the superiority of his vision of the Christian life as ruled by the Spirit and not the Mosaic Law. Satisfied that he has made his case in 5:2–6:10, Paul concludes the letter (6:11-18) by summarizing his key themes and pronouncing a blessing upon “the Israel of God.”2 1

2

The relationship of Gal 5–6 to the four preceding chapters remains debated. Even among those who analyze the epistle within rhetorical categories, agreement is lacking. Betz (Galatians, 22-23) sees 5:1–6:10 as the exhortatio, while Longenecker (Galatians, 184-87) claims the exhortatio stretches from 4:12–6:10. By contrast Witherington (Grace in Galatia, 25-36) regards 3:1–6:10 as the probatio. Apart from rhetorical approaches proposals range from those that contend for a significant break between Gal 3–4 and 5–6 (e.g., Fung, Galatians, 243, though he makes the break at 5:13) and those who emphasize Gal 5–6 as the culmination of the argument begun in 3:1; see, e.g., Barclay, Obeying the Truth, 9-26; Cosgrove, Cross and the Spirit, 147-67. For differing proposals on the internal structure of Gal 5-6, in addition to the commentaries and the references in the previous note, see, e.g., Frank J. Matera, "The Culmination of Paul's Argument to the Galatians: Gal 5:1–6:17," JSNT (1988): 79-91; J. Scott Duvall, "'Identity-Performance-Result': Tracing Paul's Argument in Galatians 5 and 6," SwJT 37 (1994): 30-38; Gordon D. Fee, "Freedom and the Life of Obedience (Galatians 5:1-6:18)," RevExp 91 (1994): 201-17. Scholars continue to debate whether


205

4.2 Instances of Isaianic Influence Instances of Isaianic Influence By comparison with the previous four chapters, the quantity of Isaianic appropriations is smaller, but their significance remains important. We will once again proceed through each section of Gal 5–6, noting the places where an Isaianic background illuminates the text.

4.2.1 Galatians 5:2-153 Paul begins this section by refocusing the discussion on circumcision, which he clearly understands to be a synecdoche for the whole Law (5:3).4 Such a submission to the Mosaic Law is a tangible statement that a person no longer relies upon Christ for justification (5:4). Instead the Galatians should wait for the hope of righteousness by faith and in the Spirit, while allowing their faith to work through love (5:5-6). He then returns to criticizing his opponents, culminating in his wish that those troubling the Galatians concerning circumcision would mutilate themselves (5:7-12). Lest anyone conclude that the freedom of the gospel is merely an opportunity for unbridled indulgence of the flesh, Paul summons the Galatians to serve one another through love (5:13). This exhortation rests upon the conviction that the Law is summed up in the command to love one’s neighbor (5:14), and a warning that failure in this area will lead to the destruction of the church (5:15). Within this section two inter-related ideas have strong thematic connections with Isaiah: freedom (5:13) and through love serving one another (5:13). The emphasis on freedom in Gal 5:2-15 is a development from the conclusion of the Hagar-Sarah trope of 4:21–5:1.5 Paul asserts that

3

4 5

5:1 belongs with what precedes or follows it. Although we are persuaded that the :Ide evgw. Pau/loj that begins 5:2 signals the beginning of a new section, the transitional nature of 5:1 makes it unnecessary to be dogmatic on a decision either way. Most scholars prefer to connect 5:13-15 with 5:16-26 rather than 5:2-12; see, e.g., Barclay, Obeying the Truth, 9-26; Cosgrove, Cross and the Spirit, 154-60; Fee, God’s Empowering Presence, 420-25; Ciampa, Presence and Function, 364-67. Our decision to group 5:13-15 with 5:2-12 rests more on thematic grounds than literary structure. However, Witherington (Grace in Galatia, 359-64) does see 5:2-15 as the fifth of seven arguments in the probatio (3:1–6:10) in his rhetorical structuring, making our choice to group 5:2-15 together at least plausible. Although not stated in this way, cp. the similar conclusions of Barclay, Obeying the Truth, 61-64; Hong, Law in Galatians, 108-9; Brice L. Martin, Christ and the Law in Paul (NovTSup 62; New York: E.J. Brill, 1989), 88-89. As we noted in the previous chapter, the freedom/slavery contrast begins as early as 3:23, comes to the fore in 4:1-7 and builds to its climax in 4:21–5:1. In our discussion of the exodus motif in Gal 4:1-7, we noted four particularly significant works: Scott,

206

Freeing the Servant’s Family

Christ set the Galatians free for the purpose of freedom and draws the conclusion that the Galatians should continue to stand firm in that freedom rather than be subjected to a yoke of slavery (5:1). In 5:2-12 Paul then applies the conclusion of 5:1 to the pressing issue in Galatia: circumcision. Behind his discussion lies the contrast between freedom and slavery succinctly stated in 5:1, and as he has done frequently in Galatians, Paul then associates elements of his discussion with either freedom or slavery. In the freedom column are Paul (5:2-3, 10-12), Christ (5:2, 4, 6), justification (5:4), grace (5:4), faith (5:5-6), the Spirit (5:5), hope (5:5), love (5:6), indifference towards circumcision (5:6) and the cross (5:11). By contrast the following are linked to slavery: circumcision (5:2-3, 6, 11-12), obligation (5:3), the Law (5:3, 4), being severed from Christ (5:4), falling from grace (5:4), being hindered from obeying the truth (5:7) and judgment (5:10). Therefore even though freedom is not explicitly mentioned in Gal 5:2-12, it is clearly presupposed. Freedom returns to the surface in 5:13 when Paul reminds the Galatians they were called to freedom. The nature of that freedom is then explained, first by negation and then by affirmation. Negatively freedom must not become an opportunity for the flesh; positively freedom expresses itself in love that serves one another (5:13). In the following verse Paul grounds (note the ga,r) the latter statement with a citation from Lev 19:18, claiming that in this statement the whole law is fulfilled (peplh,rwtai).6 All that remains is to warn the Galatians of the dangers of spiritual cannibalism (5:15).

6

Adoption, 121-86; Keesmaat, Paul and his Story, 155-215; Hafemann, “Exile of Israel,” 329-71; Wilder, Echoes, 86-104. Of the four, only Keesmaat and Wilder deal in any significant manner with Galatians 5. Cp. Rom 13:8-10 and the similar statement of Jesus in Matt 22:36-40; Mark 12:28-31; Luke 10:25-28. On the use of Lev 19:18 in Paul, see, e.g., Victor P. Furnish, The Love Command in the New Testament (Nashville: Abingdon, 1972), 91-131; E. P. Sanders, Paul, the Law, and the Jewish People (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983), 93-104; Schreiner, Law and Its Fulfillment, 145-78. For treatments focusing on the occurrences in the synoptics, see, e.g., Furnish, Love Command, 22-90; Marius Reiser, "Love of Enemies in the Context of Antiquity," NTS 47 (2001): 411-27; James D. G. Dunn, Jesus Remembered (Christianity in the Making vol. 1; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans , 2003), 584-86. Although it cannot be proven, the fact that Paul summarizes the Law by citing Lev 19:18 (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14) suggests that he was aware of Jesus’ own similar statements (Matt 22:34-40; Luke 10:25-29). The presence of the same idea in James 2:8 further indicates that this piece of Jesus tradition was particularly important for the early Christians as they wrestled with the question of their relationship to the Mosaic Law. Although a similar approach can be found among certain Jewish traditions contemporary with Paul and later, the key difference is that Paul uses such a summary to advocate dismissal of certain aspects of the Law; for Jewish texts and discussion, see Barclay, Obeying the Truth, 135-36.


207

In our discussion of Gal 4:1-7, we have already argued that Paul describes the redemption of the church through the language of Isaiah’s new exodus.7 In Isa 40–55 the need for a second exodus is premised upon Israel’s captivity; this captivity is the underlying problem that Isaiah addresses in these chapters.8 The language and imagery Isaiah uses to portray this captivity is diverse, and a comprehensive survey is neither possible or necessary.9 Instead we will explore the freedom/slavery contrast within Isa 40–55 from three different angles: the mission of the Servant, the condition of Israel, and freedom of the redeemed. Because the first two are so closely linked in Isaiah, we will treat them together. Central to the mission of the Isaianic Servant is freeing captives, mentioned explicitly in the first two Servant songs (42:1-9; 49:1-13) and implied in the last two (50:4-11; 52:13–53:12).10 According to Isa 42:7 Yahweh appoints the Servant “to bring out [ayciÛAhl. / evxagagei/n] from the dungeon the prisoners [rySia; / dedeme,nouj], from the house of confinement [al,K,Þ tyBeîmi / evx oi;kou fulakh/j] those who dwell in darkness [%v,xo) / evn sko,tei ]”; in Isa 49:9 the Servant says “to those who are bound [ ~yrIWsa]l;( / toi/j evn desmoi/j], ‘Go forth [Waceê / evxe,lqate]!’ to those in darkness [%v,xoßB; / evn tw/| sko,tei], ‘Appear!’”11 An indirect reference to the darkness surrounding exilic Israel is found in Isa 50:10, where Yahweh addresses the exile as one “who walks in darkness [hk'vex] / evn sko,tei] and has no light.” Similar descriptions of exilic Israel are found throughout Isa 40–55; they are plundered and in bondage (42:22-25; 49:24-26; 52:2-4), in exile (45:13), bereft of children (49:14-21) and without a husband (50:1-2). Throughout Isa 40–55 Israel’s exile is linked to her sin. Israel is blind and deaf (42:18-20) and given over to plunder by Yahweh, against whom they sinned (42:24-25). Yahweh is wearied by Israel’s sins (43:2224) and as a result he sells her into captivity (50:1). Yet despite her sin Yahweh promises to restore Israel (43:1-7; 44:1-5, 21-23) for the sake of his own name (48:11) by dealing with Israel’s sin and removing her transgressions from her (43:25; 44:22). By linking Israel’s political captivity to her sin Isaiah makes it clear that the former is a result of the 7 8 9 10 11

See above, 161-67. Note especially Isa 39:6-7, where Isaiah informs Hezekiah that his sons will become servants of the Babylonian king; the announcement of comfort immediately follows in 40:1ff. On the theme of exile in Isa 40–55, see Anderson, “Exodus Typology,” 177-95; George A. F. Knight, Exile and After: Studies in Isaiah 40–55 (London: Lutterworth, 1966); Stuhlmueller, Creative Redemption, 135-68; Watts, “Consolation,” 31-59. On these interconnections, see Grelot, Poèmes, 82-117. Also noted in Koole, Isaiah III, 3:40-41; Ekblad, Servant Poems, 122-24.

208


latter; or perhaps better, Israel’s political captivity is a vivid picture of her captivity to sin. Whatever resolution is offered, then, must deal not only with Israel’s political enslavement, but more fundamentally her bondage to sin. Isaiah’s solution is the suffering servant of Isa 52:13– 53:12, whose suffering is portrayed in terms similar to that of exilic Israel.12 That suffering is in fact vicarious;13 the Servant suffers for Israel’s griefs and sorrows (53:4), transgressions and iniquities (53:5-6) and his vindication results in justification and the prosperity of his seed (53:1012). The implication is that the vicarious death of the Servant has freed his people by exhausting the curse Israel was under, freeing her from sin’s enslavement. This implication is confirmed by what follows in Isaiah 54, which portrays in different images the freedom resulting from the Servant’s suffering and vindication. Formerly barren Zion will have so many descendants ([r;z< / spe,rma) that she will be unable to contain them (54:13). She who formerly considered herself divorced (50:1) will be reunited to Yahweh her husband (54:4-8), whose anger has been replaced with compassion and peace (54:9-10). Zion will be rebuilt with precious materials and inhabited by those who are taught by Yahweh (54:11-13). But the clearest expression of restored Israel’s freedom is reserved for 54:1417. She will be far from oppression and terror (14-15), and no weapon or accusation will harm Yahweh’s redeemed (16-17). The final two lines of 54:17 provide a natural transition to a discussion of Paul’s command in Gal 5:13, “through love serve one another [dia. th/j avga,phj douleu,ete avllh,loij].” In Isaiah 54:17 Yahweh declares “this is the inheritance [hl'x]n: / klhronomi,a] of those who serve [ydE’b.[; / toi/j qerapeu,ousin] Yahweh and their righteousness [~t'²q'd>ciw> / di,kaioi] is from me.”14 As we have noted above, Isa 54:17 is the first plural occurrence of db[ in Isa 40–66, and from this point it occurs only in the plural for the remainder of Isaiah.15 The result is that the “saving work of the Servant creates servants”;16 in other words, the Suffering Servant has freed his people from their sin so that they might serve Yahweh. These servants are those whose righteousness is from Yahweh, and thus by implication 12 13 14

15 16

See above, 144-45. See above, 144-45. Although the Göttingen text reads toi/j qerapeu,ousin, Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion read twn doulwn. Similarly, these three versions also read dikaiosunh instead of di,kaioi. But regardless of the exact wording of the LXX, the point here is not to contend for a verbal allusion or echo but rather a thematic parallel, in which case the specific wording is not crucial. See above, 71-75. Motyer, Prophecy, 451.


209

not something that they have merited. The blessings detailed in Isa 54 are summed up as the inheritance (klhronomi,a) of the servants of Yahweh (54:17). One might even argue that this freedom to serve Yahweh, unrestricted by the constraints of spiritual and political oppression, is pictured as the ultimate goal of the Servant’s redemption.17 The thematic parallels in Gal 5:1-13 are suggestive.18 We have already argued that Paul presents himself in Gal 1–2 as the Servant of Yahweh through whom Jesus Christ, the ultimate Servant, fulfills the commission of Isa 49. Here we may note that Paul’s insistence on the freedom that Christ freed the Galatians to experience (5:1) resonates with the picture that emerges from Isaiah 40–55 of the Servant freeing captives. Paul has already compared bondage to the Law and the elementals to a master from which Jew and Gentile must be freed (4:1-7). But the death (3:13-14; 4:4-5) and resurrection (1:4; 4:26-28) of the Servant have freed those identified with Christ. So just as the Isaianic Servant frees his people from their captivity to serve Yahweh in freedom, so too Christ has freed the Galatians to serve one another through love (5:13). Therefore although we do not find any allusions to or echoes of Isaiah regarding the specific terminology of freedom, there are thematic parallels that are at least consistent with Paul’s previous use of Isaianic second exodus imagery earlier in Gal 4:1-7, culminating in the trope of 4:21–5:1 that concludes with an assertion of the believer’s freedom in 5:1 and a call in 5:13 for the Galatians to become servants to one another.

17 18

So also Oswalt, Isaiah 40–66, 430-32; cp. similarly Wright, New Testament and the People of God, 276. Much of what is presented in this paragraph overlaps with the insights of Wilder, Echoes, 177-82. The primary difference is that Wilder focuses on what he regards as the primary background of Ps 143:10 and the secondary background of Stoicism. Wilson (“Wilderness,” 565) suggests that the call to freedom in 5:13 may “evoke the eschatological overtones of restoration that often accompany the language of ‘calling’ in the prophets, notably Isaiah (41.9; 42.6; 48.15; 51.12)”; see also Thielman, Paul and the Law, 135, who makes a similar connection to Isaiah.

210


4.2.2 Galatians 5:16-2619 The Le,gw de, that begins 5:16 signals a shift in the argument, albeit in continuance of the preceding section.20 Paul lays out a contrast between walking pneu,mati and carrying out the evpiqumi,an sarko,j, a contrast that dominates 5:16-26. In 5:17 flesh and Spirit are described as constant combatants, locked in a fierce battle. Perhaps Paul’s most daring move in this section is what follows in 5:18, where he once again associates the desires of the flesh with being under the Law. 21 The contrast between flesh and Spirit is then advanced by comparing the respective actions and attitudes that flow from each; in 5:19-21 Paul begins with ta. e;rga th/j sarko,j before moving on to o` . . . karpo.j tou/ pneu,matoj in 5:2223.22 He then reminds the Galatians that belonging to Christ implies that they have already crucified the flesh (5:24) before summarizing in 5:25-26. If believers live pneu,mati they must walk pneu,mati (5:25);23 by 19

20 21 22

23

The secondary literature on this section is abundant; in addition to the commentaries see, e.g., William Barclay, Flesh and Spirit: An Examination of Galatians 5:19-23 (London: SCM Press, 1962), 1-127; Lull, Spirit in Galatia, 113-33; C. K. Barrett, Freedom and Obligation: A Study of the Epistle to the Galatians (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1985), 7190; J. Barclay, Obeying the Truth, 110-25; Cosgrove, Cross and the Spirit, 163-67; Walter B. Russell, "Does the Christian Have "Flesh" in Gal 5:13-26?," JETS 36 (1993): 179-87; Fee, God’s Empowering Presence, 427-58; Walter B. Russell, "The Apostle Paul's Redemptive-Historical Argumentation in Galatians 5:13-26," WTJ 57 (1995): 333-57; Martyn, Theological Issues, 251-66; Wilder, Echoes of the Exodus, 201-49; B. Longenecker, Triumph, 70-78. For the argument that the contrast between flesh and Spirit is dependent upon the Two Ways tradition flowing from a Deuteronomistic framework, see C. M. Pate, The Reverse of the Curse: Paul, Wisdom, and the Law (WUNT 114; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000), 180-81. Cp. the same phrase and function in Gal 4:1. This association goes as far back as Gal 3:1-5, where works of the Law and flesh are first connected. The contrast between the plural “works” of the flesh and the singular “fruit” of the Spirit may be significant on at least two levels. First, whereas works emphasizes what a person does, fruit stresses the organic outworking of the Spirit’s presence in a person’s life. Second, the plural works opposed to the singular fruit highlights the multiplicity of actions that the flesh produces in contrast to the unified outworking of the ethical qualities manufactured by the Spirit; cf. Burton, Galatians, 313; Schlier, Galaterbrief, 255-56; see Fee, God’s Empowering Presence, 444 for a salutary caution on making too much of this contrast. The use of the term ta. e;rga th/j sarko,j may also recall Paul’s criticism of e;rgwn no,mou in 2:16 (3x); 3:2, 5, 10. For a helpful discussion of these and other aspects of the flesh/Spirit contrast in Gal 5:16-26, see Russell, “Redemptive-Historical,” 349-56. Fee (God’s Empowering Presence, 456-57) is probably correct in regarding the protasis (Eiv zw/men pneu,mati) as referring to being brought to life by the Spirit (so also Barclay, Obeying the Truth, 155) and the apodosis (pneu,mati kai. stoicw/men) indicating the ongoing experience of the believer as empowered by the Spirit. On such a view the present tense would be ingressive; see BDF §337.1. Lull (Spirit in Galatia, 110) suggests that walking by the Spirit should be equated with the freedom spoken of in 5:1, 13.


211

using a first-class conditional statement Paul indicates that the latter should naturally follow the former. All that remains is to apply this principle to the specific matters of interpersonal interaction. The description of the work of the Spirit in Gal 5:16-26 is the climactic statement of a theme that Paul first introduced in Gal 3:2-5 and mentioned only in passing in 3:14; 4:6, 29; 5:5. To this point we have for the most part delayed our discussion of the Isaianic roots of Paul’s exposition of the Spirit, so although our analysis will center on Gal 5:16-26 we must also incorporate insights from his previous references to the Spirit in order to fully appreciate Paul’s presentation of the Spirit. The Spirit is first mentioned in 3:2, where Paul asks “By works of the Law did you receive the Spirit or by hearing with faith?” Later in 3:5, he asks a similar question: “Does the one who supplies the Spirit to you and works wonders among you do so by works of the Law or by hearing with faith?” In between (3:3) he asks yet another question: “Having begun by/in the Spirit [pneu,mati] are you now being completed by/in the flesh [sarki]?” These three questions serve to introduce and frame the lengthy argument of Gal 3–4, and as such place the Spirit at the center of Paul’s concern.24 But before moving on to a discussion of the subsequent references to the Spirit in Gal 3–4, we should note that the flesh/Spirit contrast that plays such a key role in Gal 5:16-26 is first introduced in 3:3. What this observation demonstrates is that Paul’s ethical instructions in Gal 5–6 are not an afterthought to the theological argument of Gal 3–4 nor a shift to address a separate libertine faction within the Galatian churches.25 Instead, the paraenesis of Gal 5–6 is a

24

25

The importance of the Spirit in Gal 3:1-14 for the argument of Galatians is argued most forcefully by Cosgrove, Cross and the Spirit, 39-86. From the starting point of the references of the Spirit in 3:1-5, Cosgrove contends that the central point of contention between Paul, the opponents and the Galatians is whether or not life in the Spirit depended on Torah observance (45). He then traces the theme of the Spirit through the rest of Gal 3–4, connecting all of the major motifs back to the original question of Gal 3:5 (48-85). Later he seeks to draw out how the ethical exhortations of Gal 5–6 build upon and extend the foundation laid in Gal 3–4 (147-167). Although he overstates his thesis, Cosgrove’s work has helpfully demonstrated the unity of Gal 3–6 and the importance of the Spirit within these chapters; for a helpful critique of Cosgrove’s work, see Donald A. Carson, "The Cross and the Spirit: A Study in the Argument and Theology of Galatians (Review)," TrinJ 11 (1990): 239-42. For the view that the ethical instructions mark a decided shift in the letter, see Fung, Galatians, 243. For the view that Paul must contend with two different factions (one legalistic, addressed in Gal 3–4; one libertine, refuted in Gal 5–6), see Willhelm Lütgert, Gesetz und Geist: Eine Untersuchung zur Vorgeschichte des Galaterbriefes (Gütersloh: Bertelsmann, 1919); Ropes, Singular Problem; F. R. Crownfield, "The Singular Problem of the Epistle to the Galatians," JBL 64 (1945): 491-500.

212


natural extension of Paul’s argument beginning as far back as Gal 3:2-5 and is central to the argument of Galatians.26 After the introductory remarks of Gal 3:1-5, the next mention of the Spirit comes in 3:14. There the Spirit is presented as the end goal of the blessing of Abraham being realized in Christ Jesus, a conclusion reached in light of Isa 44:3-5.27 Not until Gal 4:6 does the Spirit reappear in Paul’s argument. In arguing that in Christ the Galatians have already experienced Isaiah’s promised second exodus,28 Paul highlights the Spirit as the preeminent blessing of adoption into God’s family.29 The final reference to the Spirit in Gal 3–4 comes in 4:29, where Paul once again returns to the flesh/Spirit contrast, but this time applies it to the children of the present Jerusalem and those of the heavenly Jerusalem. Those who are born “according to the Spirit [kata. pneu/ma]” (4:29) are “children of promise [evpaggeli,aj te,kna]” (4:28). So in each mention of the Spirit in Gal 3:6–4:29 the Spirit is linked to the promise, whether explicitly (3:14; 4:29) or implicitly (4:6). The picture that emerges from this admittedly brief survey is that Paul throughout Gal 3–4 presents the Spirit as the preeminent blessing of Christ’s redemption, and in each case an Isaianic text is part of the background. 30 The only other occurrence of pneu/ma before our main focused passage of Gal 5:16-26 occurs in 5:5.31 Paul claims that believers 26 27 28 29 30 31

See the similar conclusions of Cosgrove, Cross and the Spirit, 154-60; Barclay, Obeying the Truth, 106-77; Fee, God’s Empowering Presence, 420-25. See above, 146-50. See above, 161-67. Recall further the possibility that behind the dual reference to the Messiah and the Spirit as God’s agents may rests an echo of Isa 48:16-17; see above, 167 n. 142 and Beale, “Fruit of the Spirit,” 6-9. Gal 3:14 // Isa 44:3-5; Gal 4:6 // Isa 48:16-17; Gal 4:29 // Isa 54:1. For discussions of Gal 5:5, see Cosgrove, Cross and the Spirit, 151-53; Barclay, Obeying the Truth, 92-96; Fee, God’s Empowering Presence, 416-20; Silva, “Eschatological Structures,” 140-162, esp. 157-58; Hung-Sik Choi, "PISTIS in Galatians 5:5-6: Neglected Evidence for the Faithfulness of Christ," JBL 124 (2005): 467-90. At least two scholars have posited that the connection between righteousness and the eschatological Spirit referenced in Gal 5:5 is similar to that posited in Isa 32:15-17; see Cosgrove, Cross and the Spirit, 61 and Beale, “Fruit,” 9-10. Cosgrove merely makes the observation in passing without asserting the strength of the connection; Beale, on the other hand suggests at the minimum a thematic parallel to “the broader background of Isaiah’s expectation” of the combination of the Spirit and righteousness and perhaps even an allusion to Isa 32:15-17. To support this suggestion Beale notes that “the combination of the ‘Spirit’ (pneu/ma) and ‘righteousness’ (dikaiosu,nh) in an eschatological context occurs only in the book of Isaiah (Isa 11.4-5; 32.15-17; 42.1, 5-6; 61.1-3) and Jewish traditions alluding to Isa 11 (PssSol 17.37[42]; 18.8[7]; Test. Judah 24, the first two alluding to Isa 11.2, 4 and the last to 11.1-2ff.)” (9-10; emphasis original). By itself such a connection seems tenuous, but given the number of Isaianic allusions, echoes and thematic parallels throughout Galatians we consider a thematic connection between Gal


213

“in/through/by the Spirit [pneu,mati] by faith [evk pi,stewj] eagerly await the hope of righteousness [evlpi,da dikaiosu,nhj avpekdeco,meqa].”32 To this point in Galatians Paul speaks of dikaiosu,nh as a present reality (2:21; 3:6, 21),33 but here the focus appears to be future. It seems best to understand this shift from present to future righteousness as an example of inaugurated eschatology; the present righteousness that those who believe in Christ possess is a proleptic experience of the future righteousness that awaits the consummation of the messianic age. 34 Christians have been rescued from the present evil age (Gal 1:4) but still must endure a life in the flesh (Gal 2:20) lived in the overlap of the ages (Gal 5:16-26). The Spirit’s role is to empower the Christian to wait ea-

32

33 34

5:5 and the Isaianic combination of Spirit and righteousness possible, though far from certain. At least three grammatical issues confront the exegete in Gal 5:5. (1) What is the nuance of the dative pneu,mati? A minimum of three options are possible: locative, agency and means. Wallace argues strongly for means; see Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 166. But the difference between agency and means in this passage does not seem significant and may be making a distinction between the impersonal (means) and personal (agency) foreign to Paul in this context; cp. the conclusion of C. F. D. Moule, An Idiom Book of New Testament Greek (2d ed; Cambridge: University Press, 1960), 44). A locative understanding is theoretically possible, but the larger context does not emphasize the “realm” in which believers currently live; instead the focus is on explaining how it is the believer waits. Therefore it seems best to conclude that agency or means is in view without forcing too fine a distinction between the two. (2) What does evk pi,stewj modify? Despite the argument of Cosgrove (Cross and the Spirit, 152-53) that it is in apposition to pneu,mati (“the Spirit, which is from faith”), we concur with Fee (God’s Empowering Presence, 418-19) that the grammar better supports connecting evk pi,stewj to the verb avpekdeco,meqa as a way of expressing how Christians eagerly wait. For the unlikely view that evk pi,stewj refers to the faithfulness of Christ instead of the Christian’s faith, see Choi, “PISTIS,” 482-89. (3) What is the nuance of the genitive expression evlpi,da dikaiosu,nhj? The three most likely options are objective (“the righteousness for which we hope”; cp. NIV), apposition (“the hope which is righteousness”) or subjective (“that which righteousness [= oi` di,kaioi] hopes for”; cf. possibly Max Zerwick, Biblical Greek (Scripta Pontificii Instituti Biblici 114; Rome: 1963), §46 and Turner, Syntax, 214-15). After a lengthy discussion exploring these and many other options, Fung (Galatians, 224-27) persuasively argues for the subjective sense on the basis that this understanding is most consistent with the previous use of righteousness language that emphasizes the present possession of it. The same is true of the verb dikaio,w (Gal 2:16 [3x], 17; 3:8, 11, 24; 5:4). Cp. the conclusion of Silva (“Eschatological Structures,” 158) — “justification is viewed by Paul as an apocalyptic event. The fact that for believers ‘the eschatological verdict of “not guilty” is already realized’ does not suspend or even minimize the significance of the future judgment. Quite the contrary. It is precisely because we at the present enjoy God’s righteousness that we can with confidence await (avpekdeco,meqa) the final and decisive verdict.”

214


gerly for the future consummation of righteousness in cooperation with the believer’s faith.35 We are now in a position to discuss the Isaianic background of the fruit of the Spirit in Gal 5:22-23. Although a handful of scholars make passing reference to the possibility of an Isaianic background, until the recent article of G.K. Beale a sustained case had not been presented. 36 He contends that in Paul’s discussion of the fruit of the Spirit “uppermost in mind are Isaiah’s repeated prophecies (chapter 32 and especially 57) that in the new creation the Spirit would be the bearer of plentiful fruitfulness, which Isaiah often interprets to be godly attributes such as righteousness, patience, peace, joy, holiness, and trust in the Lord, traits either identical or quite similar to those in Gal 5.22-23.”37 Beale begins with a comparison of Isa 32:15-18 and 57:15-16 in the LXX:

Isaiah 32:15-18 e[wj a'n evpe,lqh| evfV u`ma/j pneu/ma avfV u`yhlou/ kai. e;stai e;rhmoj o` Cermel kai. o` Cermel eivj drumo.n logisqh,setai 16 kai. avnapau,setai evn th/| evrh,mw| kri,ma kai. dikaiosu,nh evn tw/| Karmh,lw| katoikh,sei 17 kai. e;stai ta. e;rga th/j dikaiosu,nhj eivrh,nh kai. krath,sei h` dikaiosu,nh avna,pausin kai. pepoiqo,tej e[wj tou/ aivw/noj 18 kai. katoikh,sei o` lao.j auvtou/ evn po,lei eivrh,nhj kai. evnoikh,sei pepoiqw,j kai. avnapau,sontai meta. plou,tou

Isaiah 57:15-16 ta,de le,gei ku,rioj o` u[yistoj o` evn u`yhloi/j katoikw/n to.n aivw/na a[gioj evn a`gi,oij o;noma auvtw/| ku,rioj u[yistoj evn a`gi,oij avnapauo,menoj kai. ovligoyu,coij didou.j makroqumi,an kai. didou.j zwh.n toi/j suntetrimme,noij th.n kardi,an 16 ouvk eivj to.n aivw/na evkdikh,sw u`ma/j ouvde. dia. panto.j ovrgisqh,somai u`mi/n pneu/ma ga.r parV evmou/ evxeleu,setai kai. pnoh.n pa/san evgw. evpoi,hsa

Within its original context, Isa 32:15-20 is the second half of the final section (32:9-20) of an oracle (32:1-20) that provides “prophetic instruc35 36

37

The fact that both pneu,mati and evk pi,stewj explain how the Christian eagerly awaits the hope of righteousness recalls the relationship posited in Gal 3:2-5 between faith and the Spirit (cp. 3:14 as well). G. K. Beale, “The Old Testament Background of ‘New Creation’ in Galatians 6:15 in the Light of Its Preceding Context,” (paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature, Denver, CO, 18 November 2001), 1-28. Beale notes the following who have observed the possibility of an Isaianic background to the fruit of the Spirit: Barclay, Obeying the Truth, 121; G. W. Hansen, Galatians (IVP NT Commentary 9; Downers Grove: IVP, 1994), 178; Dunn, Galatians, 308-9. Beale, “Fruit,” 2.


215

tion concerning the announcement of a royal savior.” 38 In Isa 32:15-20, Isaiah contrasts the future fecundity of Israel’s restoration with her present barrenness (32:9-14). The women are commanded to beat their breasts for pleasant fields and the fruitful vine (32:12), but at present the land produces thorns and briars instead (32:13). Such will be Israel’s condition “until [d[; / e[wj] the Spirit from on high is poured out upon you.”39 The result will be both agricultural and moral fecundity (32:1518), as well as judgment upon the enemies of God’s people (32:19). The oracle concludes with a pronouncement of blessing upon those who will dwell under the reign of the royal savior, expressed in terms that emphasize peace and security (32:20). Within chapters 56–66, Isa 57:14-21 is the first salvation oracle,40 indicating the divine solution to the false righteousness of those who claim to be God’s servants but are not.41 The oracle begins with a summons for an unidentified speaker saying “prepare the way [ %rW @Ajê[]y:) yn:åp'L.mi ‘x:Wr’-yKi in Isa 57:16, one cannot dismiss the possibility that the LXX translator has merely attempted to clarify the more passage (57:16) by assimilation to a clearer one (32:15). Cp. the reference to the “jubilant city [hz"+yLi[; hy"ßr>q]i ” in 32:13 with the “jubilant town [hz")yLi[; hy"ßr>qi]” of 22:2; both clearly refer to Jerusalem in her sinful state. When the text speaks of restoration, it invites the reader to assume that Jerusalem is at the center of that restoration.

218


eschatological people (1:4; 4:4-6). Even more significantly, Paul claims in 4:26-28 that the restoration of Jerusalem has already taken place in the death and resurrection of Jesus, and the evidence that believers participate now in that restoration is the experience of the eschatological Spirit (4:29). Furthermore, Paul refers to this redemption in summary fashion in 6:15 as a “new creation” and in 6:16 asks for “peace and mercy . . . upon the Israel of God”; at both places he is drawing upon Isaianic restoration language.49 Just as in Isa 32:15-18 + 57:15-19 the gift of the Spirit is connected to the time of Israel’s restoration when God brings eschatological salvation, and the result is spiritual fruit among his people.50

49 50

See discussion below, 228-38. An intriguing parallel may be found in the Qumran documents. In 1QS 4:3-11 a contrast is drawn between the “sons of light [rwa ynb]” and the “sons of darkness [$Xwx ynb].” In the former the “Spirit of light [rwa xwr]” is at work to produce “meekness, patience, generous compassion, eternal goodness, intelligence, understanding, [and] powerful wisdom. . . . And the reward of all who walk in it [hb; i.e., the Spirit] will be healing, abundant peace in a long life, fruitful offspring [[rz twrpw] with all eternal blessings” (4:6-7). These manifestations of the Spirit of light are then contrasted with the byproducts of the spirit of deceit, a list that includes “greed, sluggishness in the service of justice, wickedness, falsehood, pride, haughtiness of heart, dishonesty, trickery, cruelty, abundant insincerity, impatience, abundant foolishness, impudent enthusiasm for appalling acts performed in a lustful passion, filthy paths in the service of impurity, blasphemous tongue, blindness of eyes, hardness of hearing, stiffness of neck, hardness of heart in order to walk in all the paths of darkness and evil cunning” (4:9-11). While by no means agreeing in the exact details, this passage from Qumran provides a clear parallel to Gal 5:19-23. But it must be noted that the theological framework differs between 1QS 4:3-11 and Gal 5:19-23. In Qumran this state of conflict between the spirits of light and darkness has been ongoing since the day God created the world (1QS 3:24-26), while in Galatians Paul is contending that this conflict between the Spirit and the flesh is something brought about by God’s decisive redemptive action in Christ. Mention should also be made here of the suggestion by Beale (“Fruit,” 13-15) that 1QS 4:3-7 alludes to Isa 11:1-5, which speaks of manifestations of the Spirit in terms of moral fruit. He goes on to note that in both 1QS 8:1-5 and 1QH 6:15-19 a combined allusion to Isa 11 and 60 is present, speaking of the community as an “everlasting planting [~lw[ t[=j=ml]” (1QS 8:5). After noting possible Isaianic allusions in T. Jud. 24:1-6 and Pss. Sol. 14:1-5, Beale (“Fruit,” 16-17) summarizes “All of these texts from Qumran and early Judaism attest a penchant to describe eschatological Israel as spiritually fruitful, often in connection to the dynamic work of God’s Spirit that has reinstituted the primordial conditions of fertility, occasionally even referring explicitly to Eden. Sometimes botanical images from Isaiah are actually employed in the depictions. Several of these passages refer to various virtues that are directly connected to or are expressions of the ‘fruit’ image, while the other texts imply this. Thus, though they do not appear to be interdependent, both Paul in Gal 5.22 and some of these Jewish texts are on parallel tracks in describing, through the language of Isaiah, their respective communities as bearing ‘fruit’ produced by God’s ‘Spirit’. That contemporary Jewish exegesis could do this makes more plausible the notion that Paul was capable of doing it.”


219

But there is more than a thematic parallel between the fruit of the Spirit in Gal 5:22-23 and Isa 32:15-18 + 57:15-19. Several verbal connections are present between Gal 5:22-23 and Isa 57:15-21. Isa 57:15-20

~r"ä rm;øa' hko’ •yKi 15 ‘d[; !kEïvo aF'ªnIw> ~Arïm' Amêv. vAdåq'w> !AK+v.a, vAdßq'w> x:Wrê-lp;v.W ‘aK'D:-ta,w> ~yliêp'v. x:Wrå ‘tAyx]h;l. bleî tAyàx]h;l.W* al{Ü yKiä 16 `~yai(K'd>nI al{ïw> byrIêa' ‘~l'A[l. @Ac+Q.a, xc;n yTip.c;îq' %l,YEïw: @co=q.a,w> rTEås.h; 18 ÀB*li %rnI ~Y"åK; ~y[iÞv'r>h'w> lk'êWy al{å ‘jqev.h; yKiÛ vp,r rKoðz>YIw: 11 ~Y"©mi ~leä[]M;h;( ŸhYEåa; AM+[; ~F'îh; hYE±a; Anëaco y[eäro tae… 12 Àv*d>q' x:Wrï-ta, ABßr>qiB. [;Arßz> hv,êmo !ymiäyli ‘%yliAm ‘~yIm;’ [;qE)ABÜ AT+r>a;p.Ti ~veî Alß tAfï[]l; ~h,êynEP.mi ~k'ÞyliAm 13 `~l'(A[ rB"ßd>MiB; sWSïK; tAm+hoT.B; ‘hm'heB.K; 14 `Wlve(K'yI al{ï hw"ßhy> x:Wrï drEête h['äq.BiB; ^êM.[; T'g>h:ånI !Ke… WNx,_ynIT. `tr / parw,xunan to. pneu/ma to. a[gion auvtou/]”;60 as a result Yahweh became their enemy (63:10). But then 59

60

“There is wide scholarly agreement over the form and structure of this unit” (Childs, Isaiah, 522). As mentioned in the previous note, however, a number of textual difficulties make determining the original text challenging; we will only note those that are germane to our discussion. Here and Ps 51:3 are the only two places in the OT (MT or LXX) where the adjective “holy” is applied to God’s Spirit. Although the angel of God’s presence in 63:9 and the Holy Spirit in 63:10 are in some sense related to one another, they should not be equated, as is done by Charles A. Briggs, "The Use of Ruach in the Old Testament," JBL 19 (1900): 132-45, esp. 144. The fact that the Spirit is described as being grieved leads Oswalt (Isaiah 40–66, 608) to regard 63:11 as being “close to the fully developed NT concept of the third person of the Trinity.” Ma (Until the Spirit Comes, 131) is


223

“he [i.e., Yahweh] remembered the days of old, the one who brought up from the land the shepherd of the sheep” (63:11 LXX). 61 What follows next is a question — “Where is the one who placed among them the Holy Spirit?” (63:11 LXX).62 Isaiah invokes Yahweh’s gracious presence among his people in the exodus as a type for God’s future presence among his people when he once again leads them in a second exodus. 63 Isaiah 63:12-14 go on to mention how Yahweh redeemed Israel, but with a particular focus on his leading the people; in the LXX the verb a;gw occurs three times and the synonym o`dhge,w once in these three verses.64 Significantly, in 63:13 it is the Lord who led them, while in 63:14 it is the Spirit, indicating that the Spirit was in fact the agent through whom God led his people.65

61

62

63

64

65

more restrained in his assessment that here in 63:10 “the ‘holy spirit’ is a substitution for the direct revelation of God himself to his people.” The MT reading is confusing — “Moses his people [AM+[; hv,ämo] remembered the days of old.” The LXX translator has simply omitted the phrase “Moses his people” and in doing so indicates that it is Yahweh who remembered; cp. Wilder, Echoes, 131-32. The LXX has also transformed the plural “shepherds of the flock [Anëaco y[eäro]” into the singular “shepherd of the flock [to.n poime,na tw/n proba,twn].” For a concise discussion of the variants, see Barthélemy, Critique, 438-39. The LXX has transformed the singular “in his midst [ABßr>qiB.]” of the MT into the plural “among them [evn auvtoi/j].” As the MT stands it is unclear whether Moses (as argued by Koole, Isaiah III, 3:363-64; Oswalt, Isaiah 40-66, 608) or the people of Israel (considered collectively [Wilder, Echoes, 132] or emended to a plural [Childs, Isaiah, 519, 524]) is in view. Wilder (Echoes, 130-38) argues forcefully that the description of the Spirit’s presence and work among the Israelites refers to the cloud of presence. In addition to the general use of exodus imagery in the surrounding context, Wilder presents three arguments. (1) The reference to the Spirit being in the midst of people parallels Num 14:14, where Yahweh’s presence is manifested by the cloud. (2) Functions performed by the Spirit in Isa 63:14 are attributed to the exodus cloud elsewhere — giving rest (Exod 33:14 // Isa 63:14), leading the people (Ps 78:52-53 // Isa 63:14) and descending (Exod 33:9; Num 11:25 // Isa 63:14). (3) The verb o`dhge,w “lead” used in Isa 63:14 to refer to the Spirit leading the people is frequently used in reference to the exodus event (e.g., Deut 1:33; Neh 9:12; Ps 143:10). He then goes on to argue that Paul makes a similar link between the Spirit and the exodus cloud (137), but Wilder does not incorporate Isa 63:14 into his later discussion of Gal 5:18. Twice a;gw renders a form of %lh (63:12, 13), while the other occurrence translates ghn in 63:14. The verb o`dhge,w in 63:14 apparently renders xwn (“to give rest”); if this was an intentional rather than unintentional choice the LXX translator may be giving further emphasis to the notion of leading. The Spirit as the leader of God’s people is implied rather than directly stated in the MT. In 63:13 the question is raised “who led them through the depths [tAm+hTo .B; ~k'ÞyliAm]”; after two images of leading Isaiah asserts “the Spirit of Yahweh gave them rest [WNx,_ynIT. hw"ßhy> x:Wrï]” (63:14). An inference is then drawn in the following clause — “so you led your people [^êM.[; T'g>h:ånI !Ke…].” So although the MT does directly assert that the Spirit of Yahweh led the people, that is a fair inference from the context. The LXX alters the sense when it says “the Spirit from the Lord descended [kate,bh pneu/ma para. kuri,ou]” (in the MT it is the cattle who descend) and then continues “and led them [kai. w`dh,ghsen auvtou,j]” (in contrast to “gave them rest” in the MT). But the LXX

224


The combination of a;gw and pneu/ma appears only four times in the LXX — Isa 63:14; Ezek 8:3; 11:1, 24.66 The three Ezekiel occurrences speak of the Spirit lifting (avnalamba,nw) Ezekiel up and leading him in a vision, and as such are not close parallels to Gal 5:18. But the context of Isa 63:11-14 has additional thematic parallels to Gal 5:18. In both places there appears to be an underlying “second exodus” motif in which emphasis is placed upon the leading of the Spirit. This leading will take place when God redeems his people; for Isaiah that moment was in the future, whereas for Paul the decisive redemption had already taken place in Christ. For Paul, the promised leading of the Spirit is now a present reality among God’s eschatological people. The contextual and thematic correspondence combined with the verbal links establish the plausibility of at least a thematic parallel, and perhaps even an echo of Isa 63:11-14 in Gal 5:18. The eschatological experience of the Spirit leading his people is further evidence for Paul that the promised Isaianic second exodus has taken place in the Christevent, and believers participate in this by faith. The fact that Isa 57:1521 stands behind Paul’s discussion of the fruit of the Spirit in Gal 5:2223 adds further support for the proposed echo of Isa 63:14 in Gal 5:18 and is only strengthened by thematic similarities between Isa 57:15-21 and 63:11-14.67 But the fact that Paul warns the Galatians that those who practice ta. e;rga th/j sarko,j will not inherit the kingdom of God further indicates that they, like the Israelites in the desert, have not yet experienced the consummation of that redemption. 68 They are, in the words of one scholar, “somewhere in between an Exodus-like redemption and

66

67 68

agrees with the MT in the next clause — “in this way you [Yahweh] led your people [ou[twj h;gagej to.n lao,n sou].” Admittedly, then, pneu/ma is not the subject of the participle h;gagej, but both the MT and LXX clearly imply that God led his people through the agency of the Spirit; cp. Ma (Until the Spirit Comes, 201), who suggests that “the change from the third person (v. 14a) to the second (v. 14b) seems to imply that the spirit here has a more direct reference to God himself.” This is not to say that these are the only places where the OT speaks of God leading his people through his Spirit; the concept is sufficiently well-attested (see, e.g., Neh 9:19-20; Ps 143:10; Hag 2:4-5 and the discussion of these texts in Wilder, Echoes, 12174). The point we are making here is that the specific combination of a;gw and pneu/ma is surprisingly rare for such a common concept, and as such lends further weight to the plausibility of an echo of Isa 63:11-15. In addition to the second exodus parallels, one may also note that both speak of the Spirit of God coming down from God to lead Israel in the future restoration; see Beale, “Fruit,” 10-11, n. 37. Paul makes similar statements in 1 Cor 6:9-11 and Eph 5:5. Here in Galatians the language of inheriting the kingdom must be linked back to the references to heirs and inheritance in 3:18, 29; 4:1, 7, 30. Also noteworthy is the connection between inheriting the kingdom mentioned in connection with the Spirit in 5:21-23 and the promise of the Spirit in 3:14; see similarly Fee, God’s Empowering Presence, 442-43.


225

the inheritance of the ‘kingdom of God’ (5.21). They are, that is, in the wilderness . . . After having been miraculously delivered from servitude through an Exodus-like experience in Christ (1.4; 3.13; 4.4–5; 5.1), the Galatians are now contemplating a return to Egyptian-like bondage.”69 Therefore sufficient evidence exists that a profound engagement with the Isaianic presentation of the Spirit lies behind Paul’s discussion of the Spirit in Gal 5:16-26. Given that second-exodus themes were found in Gal 4:1-7, the fact that Paul would continue to draw upon related Isaianic imagery to portray the activity of the Spirit in the lives of the redeemed should not be surprising. After redeeming his people from their bondage to the elementals through his Son, God has now sent the Spirit of his Son to lead as they live within the overlap of the ages (Gal 4:1-7; 5:18). That Spirit produces eschatological fruit in believers’ lives as evidence of their redemption from the law, sin and death, empowering them to live kata. pneu/ma instead of kata. sa,rka (Gal 4:29; 5:16-18, 24-26).

4.2.3 Galatians 6:1-10 Coming as it does on the heels of Paul’s description of life in the Spirit, Gal 6:1-10 applies this description to a series of specific issues within the church: dealing with sin (6:1), bearing one another’s burdens (6:2), appropriate self-regard (6:3-5), providing for those who teach the word (6:6), sowing/reaping to the Spirit/flesh (6:7-8), and persevering in doing good (6:9-10).70 This paraenesis flows out of the contrast between 69

70

Wilson, “Wilderness Apostasy,” 550-71; the quote is from 570. Wilson (570 n. 90) further wonders “whether Paul’s juxtaposition of the ‘fruit of the Spirit’ (5.22-3) is likewise intended to evoke the wilderness narratives, though perhaps as those narrative traditions are taken up and transmuted by the prophets into a picture of eschatological restoration via the transformation of the wilderness into a fertile land (cf. Isa 32.14; 35.1-10; 41.17-20; 44.1-4; 51.1-3; 55.10-13; 58.6-11; Hos 2.14-16, 19-20 [LXX 2.1618, 20-2]; 14.4-7; Joel 2.21-2, 28-9 [LXX 2.21-2; 3.1-2])” (emphasis original). Paul’s dependence upon Isa 32:15-19; 57:15-21; 63:11-15 suggest this is exactly what he has done. Scholars remain split on how to best structure the admonitions of 6:1-10. At one extreme is Betz (Galatians, 291-311), who identifies eleven sententiae loosely related to each other. By contrast, Strelan contends that the vocabulary of commerce dominates 6:1-10, and thus financial concerns provide coherence to the section; see John G. Strelan, "Burden-bearing and the Law of Christ: A Re-examination of Galatians 6:2," JBL 94 (1975): 266-76. Witherington (Grace in Galatia, 430-35) builds on the argument of Strelan, and argues that 6:6-8 should be read together based on his conclusion that “the sowing unto the Spirit which Paul has in mind [vv. 7-8] is the support of proper teachers, materially and otherwise” (431).

226


life directed by sa,rx and that led by pneu/ma discussed in 5:16-26. In fact, one could even contend that every manifestation of the fruit of the Spirit mentioned in 5:22-23 is presupposed in the ethical instruction of 6:1-10.71 And if, as we have argued, that section depends upon an Isaianic background of eschatological fecundity produced by the Spirit, then the specific instructions of 6:1-10 are tangible examples of the fruit of the Spirit worked out in everyday situations within the church. In other words, those who already participate in the age to come, citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem, live in certain ways that demonstrate the reality of their heavenly citizenship. The specifics of 6:1-10 are intended as mile markers along the road those led by the Spirit travel as they navigate a life lived within the overlap of this present evil age and the inaugurated Messianic age to come.72 This reading of Gal 6:1-10 as descriptive images of life in the inaugurated Messianic age is further confirmed by Paul’s enigmatic claim that by bearing each other’s burdens the Galatians “fulfill the law of Christ [kai. ou[twj avnaplhrw,sete to.n no,mon tou/ Cristou/]” (6:2).73 The close 71 Cp. Barclay (Obeying the Truth, 146-70), who after a rigorous examination of the maxims of Gal 5:26-6:10, concludes that “they represent Paul’s desire to give instructions, to spell out for the Galatians in practical terms what it means to ‘walk in the Spirit.’ Many of these maxims function as practical illustrations of the ingredients of ‘the fruit of the Spirit’ — e.g., prauhi-yKi( + object. The LXX rendered the first clause with the impersonal e;stai ga,r while the second is translated o[ti ivdou. evgw. poiw/. Despite the difference, however, the parallelism remains discernable. In Revelation 21–22 John gives the clearest development of the new heavens and earth/new Jerusalem parallel; see especially Lee, New Jerusalem, 239-304 and Fekkes, Isaiah, 226-78. 104 Cf. also Dumbrell, End of the Beginning, 183; Anderson, Creation versus Chaos, 126-31; Richard Nysse, "Rebels from Beginning to End," WW 19 (1999): 161-70. Russell (New Heavens, 74-75) also notes the presence of themes from Isa 51:1-6 in 65:17-25. We may also note the merging of the themes of restored/new Jerusalem and new heavens and earth in Rev 21–22; see discussion in Lee, New Jerusalem, 267-74; Beale, “New Creation,” 15-19.


235

vites the conclusion that the new creation described in Isa 65:17-25 is somehow connected to the Servant’s work. As we have already seen, Paul makes a similar connection between the work of the Servant, the restoration of Jerusalem and new creation here in Galatians. The presence of this same connection in both Isaiah 40–66 and Galatians suggests that Paul has taken his cue at this point from Isaiah’s own merging of the three themes. Regarding the gift of the Spirit and new creation, the link between the two is clearly present in both Isa 32:15-20 and 57:15-21. Particularly obvious is Isa 32:15-20, where the outpouring of the Spirit results in wilderness becoming a fertile field (32:16), the fertile field a forest (32:16), God’s people dwelling in peace (32:18) and the ox and donkey roam free (32:20). Isaiah 57:15-21 is more subtle, but if in fact it has the divine Spirit in view, the final two clauses in the LXX may further speak of the Spirit bringing new life to God’s people — “for the Spirit from me will come forth and all breath I have created [pneu/ma ga.r parV evmou/ evxeleu,setai kai. pnoh.n pa/san evgw. evpoi,hsa].”105 That new life is connected with the Spirit in Galatians is abundantly clear from the discussion of the Spirit in chapter five, where believers are described as walking in/by the Spirit, being led by the Spirit (5:18) and living in/by the Spirit (5:25). The picture that emerges is that the Spirit endues the believer with the new life that flows from the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus, resulting in a spiritual transformation that anticipates the making of all things new. The result of our discussion of the Isaianic roots of the expression kainh. kti,sij indicates the breadth of the idea, and we are not by any means claiming that the three threads discussed above exhaust the content of the phrase. But our analysis of these threads has demonstrated that new creation motifs are present throughout Galatians and have confirmed not only that the expression kainh. kti,sij has Isaianic roots, but that several of the central themes comprising new creation also have an Isaianic background. Based then on the similar way in which the ideas of new creation are developed in both Galatians and Isaiah 40–66, along with explanatory power it provides for Paul’s choice of the term as a summary of his message to the Galatians, we think it likely 105 After a lengthy discussion of the translation possibilities of this clause in the LXX, Beale (“Fruit,” 7 n. 24) concludes that it refers “to the conditions of the new creation in which all human life would be created by God.” Interestingly, the Targum of Isa 57:16 paraphrases this final clause “for I am about to restore the spirits of the dead and the breathing beings I have made.” But even if one rejects a future reference to new creation here in Isa 57:16, new creation motifs are still present in God’s promise of peace [~Alv' / eivrh,nhn] for his restored people.

236


that by using the phrase kainh. kti,sij Paul is alluding to this theme in Isaiah. Our final example of Isaianic influence comes in Gal 6:16, where Paul follows up his statement on new creation by pronouncing “peace and mercy [eivrh,nh . . . kai. e;leoj]” upon all who walk by this rule (i.e., the priority and sufficiency of “new creation”),106 “even the Israel of God [kai. evpi. to.n VIsrah.l tou/ qeou/].”107 Recently G.K. Beale has argued that this blessing is in fact an allusion to Isa 54:10.108

106 Cf. the conclusion of Bruce, Galatians, 273; Barclay, Obeying the Truth, 99; Hubbard, New Creation, 228-29. 107 Two closely related exegetical difficulties are present in this final phrase of 6:16 — the force of the kai, that begins this last phrase and the referent of to.n VIsrah.l tou/ qeou/. Those who regard the auvtou.j and to.n VIsrah.l tou/ qeou/ as two distinct groups treat the kai, as having the force of a general connective. But among adherents there is disagreement on the identity of the “Israel of God.” Some see a reference to national Israel; see, e.g., Burton, Galatians, 358; Peter Richardson, Israel in the Apostolic Church (SNTMS 10; London: Cambridge University Press, 1969), 85; Dunn, Galatians, 344-45. Others understand the Israel of God to refer to Jewish Christians; see, e.g., Donald W. B. Robinson, "The Distinction between Jewish and Gentile Believers in Galatians," ABR 13 (1965): 29-48; A. Saldhana, "Gal 6:16: The 'Israel of God,' Christianity's Ultimate Break with Judaism?," Indian Theological Studies 34 (1997): 224-32. Still others see a reference to eschatological Israel (i.e., the “all Israel” of Rom 11:25-27 converted to Christ); see, e.g., Mussner, Galaterbrief, 417; Bruce, Galatians, 275. By contrast, those who understand the auvtou.j and to.n VIsrah.l tou/ qeou/ as referring to the same group of people (i.e., the church composed of Jew and Gentile) regard the kai, as appositional; see, e.g., S. Lewis Johnson, "Paul and the 'Israel of God': An Exegetical and Eschatological Case-study," in Essays in Honor of J. Dwight Pentecost (S. D. Toussaint and C. H. Dyer; Chicago: Moody, 1986), 181-96; C. A. Ray, "The Identity of the 'Israel of God,'," TTE 50 (1994): 105-14; Andreas J. Köstenberger, "The Identity of the ISRAEL TOU THEOU (Israel of God) in Galatians 6:16," Faith and Mission 19 (2001): 3-24. Grammar alone cannot solve the dispute, for both understandings are possible. However, within the larger context of Galatians, viewing the auvtou.j and to.n VIsrah.l tou/ qeou/ as both referring to the church composed of Jew and Gentile together fits the emphasis of the epistle on the elimination of distinction between Jew and Gentile (3:28-29) far better than a sudden distinction between Jew and Gentile; cf. Ray, “Identity,” 106-8; Longenecker, Galatians, 298-99; Hays, “Galatians,” 345-46; Köstenberger, “Identity,” 12-18. 108 Beale, “Peace and Mercy,” 204-23. Beale (207-8) also discusses other possible backgrounds, including Pss 124:5 and 127:6, Ezra 6:11, and the Shemoneh ‘Esreh before arguing for the prominence of Isa 54:10. See also Köstenberger, “Identity,” 18 n.1, 24 n.55.


Isaiah 54:10 (MT)

WvWmêy" ‘~yrIh'h,( yKiÛ 10 yDIús.x;w> hn"j

She must and shall go free: Paul's Isaianic Gospel in Galatians

Must You Go?

Bush Must Go

and the truth shall set you free

Galatians

How Wicked Can She Go

Galatians Commentary

[ss] This Star Shall Be Free

Every Thing Must Go: Metaphysics Naturalized

Every Thing Must Go: Metaphysics Naturalized

And The Truth Shall Set You Free, 21st Century Edition

How Wicked-er Can She Go

She

She

She Said, She Saw

She Said, She Saw

Law and Grace - commentary on Galatians

Shorter Commentary on Galatians

The Gospel in Brief

She

She!

She

She

She

She Walks in Beauty

She

She

She

She

She

She

She must and shall go free: Paul's Isaianic Gospel in Galatians

Must You Go?

Bush Must Go

and the truth shall set you free

Galatians

How Wicked Can She Go

Galatians Commentary

[ss] This Star Shall Be Free

Every Thing Must Go: Metaphysics Naturalized

Every Thing Must Go: Metaphysics Naturalized

And The Truth Shall Set You Free, 21st Century Edition

How Wicked-er Can She Go

She

She

She Said, She Saw

She Said, She Saw

Law and Grace - commentary on Galatians

Shorter Commentary on Galatians

The Gospel in Brief

She

She!

She

She

She

She Walks in Beauty

She

She

She

She

She

She

Recommend Documents