In framing this socio-ethical vision in terms of the dichotomy between flesh and Spirit (e.g. 5:16-17), Paul infuses their identity and ethos with apocalyptic currents. This cosmological mythic setting to his argument has run through the entire epistle (1:4, 11- 12; 2:20; 3:23-26; 4:3-7) and includes this Spirit versus flesh dualism (3:3; 4:29). J. Louis Martyn has been the leading voice in recent years to stress the apocalyptic character of Paul’s theology in Galatians. This has been a needed corrective to the view that Galatians
is the one epistle in which Paul’s apocalyptic perspective is suppressed.59
By apocalyptic,
57
Barclay, Obeying the Truth, 168; B. Longenecker, Triumph, 74; Martyn, Galatians,
554; Hays, "Christology and Ethics," 289.
58
B. Longenecker, Triumph, 77: “Ethnocentrism and egocentrism are not different
matters in Paul, but are one and the same phenomenon carried out on two different levels of existence . . . .” He observes that both are rooted in “narcissistic self-referentiality” and
that Paul’s parenesis applies to both. Cf. Barclay, Obeying the Truth, 208.
59
J. Louis Martyn, "Apocalyptic Antinomies in Paul's Letter to the Galatians," NTS 31
Martyn does not mean the particular literary genre consisting of apocalypses but a cluster of theological concepts including special revelation, cosmological dualism (two
competing spheres or powers, e.g. the Flesh and the Spirit), eschatological dualism (two distinct aeons separated by a decisive act of God’s judgment), and the imminent triumph
of God over his cosmic foes.60
The absence of discussion in Galatians of Jesus’ return, final judgment, or general resurrection has misled previous commentators to view Galatians as not being particularly apocalyptic in outlook. Martyn’s innovation has been to recognize that in Galatians, Paul has brought the primary apocalyptic motifs to bear not on the parousia but on the crucifixion. The cross is the end of the world for believers (2:20; 6:14). The cross marks the division of the aeons (1:4; 6:15). The cross is God’s victory over his foes--Sin, the flesh, and the law (3:13, 22-23; 4:4-6; 5:24). “The motif of the triple crucifixion--that of Christ, that of the cosmos, that of Paul--reflects the fact that through the whole of Galatians the focus of Paul’s apocalyptic lies not on Christ’s
parousia, but rather on his death.”61
Because this use of the adjective “apocalyptic” invites confusion, a word of clarification is in order.62
Regarding the derivation and use of this adjective, John Collins writes,
Since the adjective “apocalyptic” and the noun “apocalypticism” are derived from “apocalypse,” it is only reasonable to expect that they indicate some analogy with the apocalypses. A movement might
reasonably be called apocalyptic if it shared the conceptual framework of
character of Paul’s apocalyptic theology in Galatians. For the view that Galatians is the
exception to Paul’s otherwise apocalyptic perspective, see Johan Christiaan Beker, Paul
the Apostle: The Triumph of God in Life and Thought (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980), 57- 58.
60
Richard E. Sturm, "Defining the Word 'Apocalyptic': A Problem in Biblical Criticism," in Apocalyptic and the New Testament (ed. Joel Marcus et al.; JSNTSup 24; Sheffield:
JSOT, 1989), 17-48; cf. Martyn, Galatians, 97-105. B. Longenecker, Triumph, 43-46,
refers to these same motifs as “the eschatological frame of Paul’s letter.”
61 Martyn, "Apocalyptic Antinomies," 420. 62
B. Longenecker, Triumph, 22. For an overview of the history and causes of such
the genre, endorsing a worldview in which supernatural revelation, the heavenly world, and eschatological judgment played essential parts. … We should remember, however, that the argument depends on analogy
with the apocalypses and that the affinity is always a matter of degree.63
Collins applies the adjective to the eschatology found in Paul’s epistles and the Gospels,
as well as to social movements.64 We see in Collins’ three-point summation of the
apocalyptic “conceptual framework” substantial overlap with Martyn’s emphases. Both highlight the importance of revelation inherent in the Greek etymology of “apocalyptic.” Collins’ heavenly world presupposes the spatial dualism of Martyn’s competing spheres of power. And his eschatological judgment asserts the temporal dualism of aeons divided by God’s judgment present in Martyn’s scheme. These same elements comprise Sturm’s summary of the state of NT research into the core concepts that constitute apocalyptic theology as well as Wayne Meeks’ synthesis of the defining characteristics of literature
that is ideologically apocalyptic but not generically an apocalypse.65 This brief survey
demonstrates a debatable but workable consensus on how to use the adjective
“apocalyptic” to describe an ideology, theology, or a social movement, or even literature that is not an apocalypse. John Barclay has adopted this view regarding Galatians,
following, in particular, Meeks’ characterization:66
1. Secrets have been revealed to the author or prophet.
2. These secrets have to do with a cosmic transformation that will happen very soon. Time moves toward that climax, which separates “this age” from “the age to come.”
3. Central among the events to happen “at the end of days” is judgment: The rectification of the world order, the separation of the good from the wicked, and assigning the appropriate reward or punishment.
63 John J. Collins, The Apocalyptic Imagination: An Introduction to Jewish Apocalyptic
Literature (2nd ed; Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1998), 13.
64
Ibid., 12.
65
Wayne A. Meeks, "Social Functions of Apocalyptic Language in Pauline Christianity," in Apocalypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East: Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Apocalypticism, Uppsala, August 12-17, 1979 (ed. David Hellholm; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1983), 689, 695-98; Sturm, "Defining," 36.
66
Barclay, Obeying the Truth, 100, adopts Meeks’ typology to define “a mode of thought
4. Consequently the apocalyptic universe is characterized by three corresponding dualities: (a) the cosmic duality of heaven/earth, (b) the temporal duality this age/the age to come, and (c) a social duality: the sons of light/the sons of darkness, the righteous/the unrighteous, the elect/the world.
Meeks and Barclay both comment that this paradigm holds for Galatians so long as we recognize Paul’s innovation of locating God’s decisive act of judgment and
rectification in the past at the crucifixion.67
We have seen above that this also is Martyn’s assessment of Paul’s apocalyptic perspective in Galatians. However, unlike Martyn, I
find the structure of Paul’s thought in Galatians to be thoroughly covenantal, as well.68
In this regard, the theologies of Paul and his opponents are formally similar. They disagree over the terms of the covenant, and it is Paul’s apocalyptic understanding of the cross that accounts for this difference. According to Beverly Gaventa, the cross has revealed a fundamental antithesis between Christ and the cosmos, and this antithesis governs Paul’s
apocalyptic dualism in Galatians.69
The other antitheses in Galatians—e.g. between Christ and the law, the cross and circumcision, the Spirit and the flesh—are subsets of the Christ
versus cosmos contrast.70
This primary antithesis comes to succinct expression in 1:4, 2:20 and 6:14-15. In terms of Meeks’ and Barclay’s characterization of apocalyptic, noted above, 1) the revelation of Christ has been given to Paul and the church (1:12, 16; 3:23), 2) Christ’s death has separated the new creation from the cosmos (6:14-15), 3) the faithful will reap eternal life (6:8) but the disobedient will not (5:21), 4a) there is a cosmic duality between Christ and all creation, 4b) a temporal duality divides history at
67
Ibid., 101; Meeks, "Social Functions," 695.
68 B. Longenecker, Triumph, 17-20, 90-95; Kee, Knowing the Truth, 89-91; B.
Longenecker, "Covenant Community," passim; Barclay, Obeying the Truth, 96-105;
Wright, "Gospel and Theology," 237-38; Beverly Roberts Gaventa, "The Singularity of
the Gospel: A Reading of Galatians," in Pauline Theology, vol. 1: Thessalonians,
Philippians, Galatians, Philemon (ed. Jouette M. Bassler; Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), 158-59.
69 Gaventa, "Singularity," 152-56. 70
Ibid., 156: “These are but subsets of the more fundamental antithesis, which is between Christ/new creation and cosmos.”
the coming of “the faith” (3:23-25), 4c) a social duality exists between those who have been set free (5:1, 13) and those “enslaved to the elemental spirits of the world” (4:3).
The final category above, social duality, is of particular significance for my argument. Paul transposes the dichotomy, Jew versus Greek, from the baptismal unity formula into a decidedly apocalyptic key in 6:15, “For neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is anything; but a new creation is everything!” In the previous verse he has boasted of being
crucified with respect to the world (ko/smoj). This corelation shows that the binary social
divisions expressed by the formula fall on the cosmos side of the Christ-versus-cosmos duality. Conversely, “all of you are one in Christ Jesus” (3:28d) corresponds to the new creation. It is instructive to read the baptismal formula and its two Pauline recapitulations in Galatians side by side in view of its Pauline apocalyptic framing.
There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. (3:28) For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything; the only thing that counts is faith working through love. (5:6) For neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is anything; but a new creation is everything! (6:15)
On the Christ/new creation side of the duality we find the socio-ethical vision of unity and of faith working through love. On the cosmos side we find categorical social
alienation. For Paul it seems that the chief manifestation of the new creation in the midst of “this present evil age” (1:4) is a united, loving community composed of members who are drawn from mutually alienated groups in society at large. Paul’s insistent
categorization of circumcision and law observance on the cosmos side of the apocalyptic divide confirm that the division Jew versus Greek is part of the present evil age (4:3, 8, 9; 5:1-4; 6:15). These observations suggest that for the purpose of Paul’s argument in Galatians a chief characteristic of the “present evil age” (1:4) from which Christ gave himself to rescue believers is the division of the world into privileged versus
singularity of the gospel” produces the singularity of God’s people.71
This new identity is especially Paul’s topic in Gal 3-4, which we will examine below. But already we have seen how this new identity has radically reconfigured traditional social expectations by calling forth a new kind of social solidarity as consistent with the truth of the gospel (2:1- 14). God’s spirit produces within this new community a unity nurtured by mutual love (5:13-25). The broad antithesis between Christ and cosmos is specified in Galatians primarily in social terms. The surprising social character of the church as a reconciling
community embodies the Christ/new creation side of his governing antithesis.72
Gal 3-4: Identity and Unity in Christ
The social unity announced in 3:28 derives from the singularity of Christ and the believers’ new corporate identity in him. I will argue below that this unified, social
identity does not exclude all other social identities, as is sometimes asserted.73
Rather Paul asserts its primacy over other identities such that other allegiances must not be allowed to divide the community in Christ. Viewing Paul’s construction of identity in ethnic terms enables articulations of such nuances. The sociological concepts of nested
71
Ibid., 149, who borrows the phrase “the singularity of the gospel” from John Howard
Schütz, Paul and the Anatomy of Apostolic Authority (SNTSMS 26; Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1975), 121. She takes it as the title for her essay and means by it, “. . . Paul presupposes from beginning to end that there is only one gospel (1:6-9), the singularity of which consists of the revelation of Jesus Christ as God’s son whose crucifixion inaugurates the new age. This singular gospel results in a singular
transformation for those called as believers, who are themselves moved into a new identity in Christ alone . . . .”
72
For a similar argument and conclusions see B. Longenecker, Triumph, 63-67.
73
E.g. Gaventa, "Singularity," 149: “The new creation results in the nullification of previous identifications, whether these come from within the law (1:11-17) or from outside it (4:8-11).” It seems unnecessarily strong to assert that the new creation nullifies other identities since Paul accepts some continuation of human social identity in the church. For instance, in Gal 1:3, Titus is clearly a Greek among Jews, all of whom are brothers in Christ. Also, Paul’s modulation of the baptismal unity formula in 1 Cor 12:12- 25 to support the unity of the body that is composed of diverse members seems to accept continuity of human status within the new unity. Colossians also shows such continuity of earthly identity in 4:11b, “These are the only ones of the circumcision among my coworkers for the kingdom of God, and they have been a comfort to me.”
identities, non-contradictory social boundaries and the amalgamation model of
ethnogenesis noted above in Chapter Two (pp. 72-73) describe the social negotiations where a new identity subsumes other ones without eradicating them. Problems arise when loyalty to a pre-existing identity threatens the cohesion of the new group and the relative importance of the competing identities must be clarified. This is the case reflected in Galatians.
In the present case, the identity threatening the cohesion of the church is that defined by Torah observance. However, the presence of the two other social dichotomies in the baptismal unity formula suggest that other identities could pose such a threat, as well. In fact, in 4:1-11, Paul generalizes the argument of 3:6-29 in such a way as to apply the conclusions of Gal 3 to other possible threats to the church’s identity and unity. Nevertheless, the issue of Torah observance poses unique problems for Paul. The Scriptures of Israel are the Scriptures of the church. Paul has to conduct his argument with his Jewish opponents in Galatia on the basis of the Hebrew Scriptures. Paul claims for his churches a lineage through Israel (“you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to the promise”) via the Jewish Messiah. His ability to generalize his conclusions to other
competing identities seems to follow an a fortiori logic. If even Jewish identity according
to the Torah may not be allowed to dominate or sub-divide the church, then how much more must any other possible identity also submit to communal solidarity in Christ. This reading of Galatians 3 will highlight how Paul argues for a particular corporate identity in Christ and against an alternate construction of identity that would divide the church.