"Redeemed from the Curse of the Law" The Use of Deut 21:22-23 in Gal 3:13: Caneday

186 TRINITY JOURNAL

was already being used by the enemies of the Church."⁴ Accord-
ingly, Paul employed Deut 21:22-23 in a creative and ad hoc manner
as it served his polemic purpose.⁵ Kim follows Lindars and sum-
marizes,

    So the Jews must have looked upon the crucified Jesus as accursed
   by God. . . . The allusions to Deut 21.23 in Acts 5.30; 10.39; 1 Pet 2.24
    suggest that from the beginning the Christians encountered Jewish
   opposition based upon Deut 21.23 to their proclamations of Jesus as
   the Messiah. The Christians would hardly have applied Deut 21.23 to
   Jesus on their own initiative. Rather, they must have taken it from
   their Jewish opponents, and turned it into a weapon of counter

attack.⁶

Against Lindars's influential approach, Wilcox argues that the NT
use of Deut 21:22-23 reflects a "tree-testimonia" as "part of an early
Jewish-Christian midrashic exposition of the Akedah" and was

used to facilitate "the application of the role of Isaac to Jesus.”⁷
His study of Paul's use of Deut 21:22-23 is dominated by Jewish mid-
rashic techniques by which he seeks to "exhaust its influence" upon

the verses surrounding Gal 3:13.⁸ So Paul's warrant for using Deut
21:23 depends primarily upon his midrashic skills to find a text
with link-words to continue his catenation of citations.⁹

⁴ Lindars, New Testament Apologetic, 233. Cf. the earlier article by U.
Holzmeister, "De Christi Crucifixione Quid e Deut. 21:22 et Gal. 3:13 consequatur,"
Bib 27 (1946) 18-29. Holzmeister suggests that Deut 21:22-23 was a text brought
against Paul by Jewish opponents, a text which Paul had to answer. See also John
Hoad, "Some New Testament References to Isaiah 53," ExpTim 68 (1956-57) 254-55.

⁵Cf. Barnabas Lindars, "The Place of the Old Testament in the Formation of New
Testament Theology," NTS 23 (1976) 64. Contrast Peder Borgen ("Response," NTS 23
[1976] 75), who argues that the role of the OT in the NT "is much more than to be a
mere mode of expression used in an ad hoc way."

⁶Seyoon Kim, The Origin of Paul's Gospel (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982) 46.

⁷ Wilcox, "'Upon the Tree'," 86, 99. So Wilcox states, "In the NT model, in the
fullness of time another [like Isaac] comes to the place of sacrifice, carrying his
'wood'/ 'cross' . . . and is put upon it. . . " (p. 98).

⁸Ibid., 96-97. He finds not only the obvious link back to 3:10 (curse/blessing mo-
tif), but also a link back to the citation of Gen 12:3 by way of the promise of "the
land" (h[ gh?, Deut 21:23b), and a link forward to 3:18, "inheritance" (klhronomi<a)
possibly reflecting e]n klh<r& in the unquoted portion of Deut 21:23b. Finally, Deut 21:23

aids Paul's pesher of 3:16 with the presence of cu<lon as the "link-word" that offers the

clue to Paul's interpretation of Gen 22:6.

⁹Cf. Nils A. Dahl, "The Atonement--An Adequate Reward for the Akedah?
(Rom 8:32)," in Neotestementica et Semitica: Studies in Honour of Matthew Black (ed. by E.
Earle Ellis and Max Wilcox; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1969) 23. Concerning Gal 3:13, Dahl contends,
"There is a conscientious interpretation in the background. In Deut 21:23 it was stated that a hanged
man was accursed. This might be taken to exclude faith in a crucified Messiah, but the passage could
be turned into an argument in favour of the Christian faith if 'a man hanging upon a tree' was
combined with 'a ram caught in a thicket' (Gen 22:13). Thus the crucified Jesus was understood to be the
lamb of sacrifice provided by God. Here there is an element of typology; but the ram, rather than Isaac, is
seen as a type of Christ."

CANEDAY: DEUT 21:22-23 IN GAL 3:13 187

Generally, scholars see in Gal 3:10-13 an appropriation of the
Jewish exegetical device, gezerah shawah ("equal category").
Many argue that Paul finds verbal analogy in discrete OT texts
where, because "the same words are applied to two separate cases,
it follows that the same considerations apply to both."¹⁰ Paul's
"string of pearls" in Gal 3:10-13 may reflect Jewish literary appro-
priation techniques, for link-words are readily apparent. However,
mere ascription of the use of gezerah shawah to Paul offers little or
no explanation for the apostle's use of the selected texts beyond an
ad hoc appropriation. So Paul's warrant or authorization for em-
ploying the chosen texts (arising first from those texts and then
from his theological framework) is largely passed over without
discussion. Instead, some claim that the OT text is "wrested from its
original context or modified somehow to suit the new situation."¹¹
Two questions must be asked to determine Paul's warrant for em-
ploying Deut 21:22-23 in Gal 3:13: (1) How did the NT writers, Paul in particular,
use the OT to document their creed? (2) Upon what basis did the apostle
select Deut 21:22-23 to give credence to his assertion in Gal 3:13a?¹²

What is necessary is a reflective consideration not only of
Paul's hermeneutical techniques but also of his controlling
"hermeneutical axioms."¹³ The Christian community's theological
beliefs,¹⁴ that not only transcend but also shape its hermeneutics,
inform Paul's actual appropriation of OT texts. Accordingly, Paul's
appeals to the OT reflect this matrix of the community's beliefs
that bear directly upon the way Scripture is to be employed.

This fresh consideration of Paul's citation of Deut 21:23 in Gal
3:13 is born out of an acknowledgement of both Jewish interpretation
techniques as well as the matrix of Christian theological beliefs.
The aim is to give proper consideration to the contexts of both the
OT text and its NT citation to demonstrate Paul's warrants for ap-
plying Deut 21:22-23 to Christ. Does Paul employ this Scripture
text in an ad hoc manner, i.e., wrenched from its OT context for the

¹⁰Richard N. Longenecker, Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975)
35; cf. 117. See, e.g., F. F. Bruce, "The Curse of the Law," 30; Bruce, Commentary on Galatians
(NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982) 165.

¹¹ Joseph A. Fitzmyer, "The Use of Explicit Old Testament Quotations in Qumran Literature and
in the New Testament," Essays on the Semitic Background of the New Testament (London: Geoffrey
Chapman, 1971) 33. Concerning Paul's use of Deut 21:23, Fitzmyer states, "The only connection here
between the verse of Deuteronomy and the Pauline, use of it is the double pun of the Law's
curse and the word 'cursed' and the crucifixion of Christ and 'hung on a tree.' The orator Paul is
the one who makes the connection by putting them together" (p. 45).

¹²Cf. Wilcox, "'Upon the Tree'," 94, where he essentially asks these two questions, but fails to
seek the answer outside the entanglement of midrash.

¹³See the use of this designation in the extended discussion by Douglas J. Moo, The Old
Testament in the Gospel Passion Narratives (Sheffield: The Almond Press, 1983) 56ff.

¹⁴Cf. Longenecker, Biblical Exegesis, 50, who states, "Each of these, Pharisees, sectarians,
and Philo alike, worked from distinctive doctrinal and idealogical commitments, which
produced distinctive features in their exegetical methodologies."

188 TRINITY JOURNAL

particular purpose at hand without further considerations? Or,
does Paul find authorization in the OT text validated by his con-
temporary context that gives his argument credibility?

The presentation develops around three procedural steps. First,
Paul's hermeneutical matrix is considered to establish his ap-
proach to scripture. Second, Paul's use of Deut 21:22-23 in Gal 3:13 is
studied in three major sections: (1) a brief survey of Paul's polemi-
cal thesis in Galatians 3 to contextualize the OT citation; (2) a con-
sideration of the warranted use of Deut 21:22-23 in Gal 3:13 from
the OT text and context, and (3) Paul's NT basis for employing Deut
21:22-23 and its place in his argument. A third brief section draws
conclusions with appropriate implications.

II. PAUL'S HERMENEUTICAL MATRIX

The study of any OT text cited by Paul in Galatians 3 quickly
involves one's own biblical-theological scheme, for it draws one
into the apostle's whole argument against the Judaizers by which
he disparages the law. The exegete is confronted with the problem
of accounting for Paul's negative perspective upon the law, for his
argument in Galatians 3 suggests that he ignores the fact that the
law promised blessing to those who obeyed it. Central to his
polemic is the sanction that the law threatened, namely the curse.
Noth correctly observes, "It is . . . noteworthy that the Old
Testament itself does not appear to share Paul's judgment upon the
law, for from the law it apparently opens out the perspectives,
'blessing and curse', i.e. either blessing or curse, according as the in-
dividual or group fulfils or does not fulfil the requirements of the
law."15 Paul's view of the Mosaic law challenges the exegete's
search for an acceptable solution that properly acknowledges the
OT expressions concerning the law but also retains "what is nega-
tive in the Pauline picture of the law if God's new act in Christ is to

receive due stress."¹⁶

A. The OT Is To Be Read Salvation-Historically

Paul's argument in Galatians 3 is tightly structured and is fun-
damentally heilsgeschichtlich. It is thoroughly influenced by
Jesus' teaching concerning the epochal and eschatological character

¹⁵Martin Noth, "For all who rely on works of the law are under a curse," in The Laws in the
Pentateuch and Other Essays (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1967) 119. Though Noth's observation
is correct, he attempts to resolve the problem of Paul's perspective upon the curse of the law by
taking Deut 27:26 (cited in Gal 3:10) as a seventh century BC expression of the final redactor that
"the threatened curse had already begun to appear as an actual reality. . . .The blessing is for him
[the opinion of the author] already something unreal, but the curse a reality which in his own
day had already appeared" (pp. 128-29).

¹⁶ Douglas J. Moo, "'Law,' 'Works of the Law,' and Legalism in Paul," WTJ 45 (1983) 100.

CANEDAY: DEUT 21:22-23 IN GAL 3:13 189

of his own ministry. Jesus summarily proclaimed that the promise
of the great day of salvation (Isa 61:1, 2) dawned in him (Luke 4:18-
19), for he is the "sun of righteousness" (Mal 4:2), who rises to bring
salvation to his people (Luke 1:78, 79). He has disclosed a righ-
teousness from heaven that already announces the divine verdict of
forgiveness (cf. Matt 9:6; Luke 7:48-50) or of condemnation (John
3:18). So, for Paul, the coming of Jesus Christ, to fulfill "the law and
the prophets" (Matt 5:17ff), is the lens through which diverse and
previously diffused or unassociated elements of the OT converge.
Therefore, the apostle's retrospective reading of the OT, focalized
by Christ, sees the law functioning salvation-historically in keep-
ing with an anticipation/fulfillment motif. Christ's epoch-making

entrance into salvation history has inaugurated the new age; it has
restructured the redemptive-historical understanding of the NT
writers.¹⁷ Because Paul interprets God's great act in Christ from the
vantage point of one dwelling in the tension between fulfillment
and expectation,¹⁸ his two age construction is given two per-

spectives. On the one hand, conscious of fulfillment and yet antici-

pating consummation, he speaks in terms of "already" (2 Cor 6:2;

Eph 2:13; Rom 3:21, et al. ) and "not yet" (Rom 8:23-25, 33-34; 13:11;

1 Cor 1:30; Gal 5:5; et al. ). On the other hand, when Paul encounters

those who desire to extend the law's jurisdiction coexistent with

and coextensive to the proclamation of the gospel of Christ, the

present age is seen in sharp contrast to the former. So, Paul fre-

quently punctuated his argument in Galatians 3 with this redemp-

tive-historical contrast, e.g., "before this faith came" (pro> tou?

e]lqei?n th>n pi<stin [3:23])¹⁹ is contrasted with "now that faith has

come" (e]lqou<shj th?j pi<stewj [3:25]).²⁰

¹⁷ Cf. Geerhardus Vos, The Pauline Eschatology (Princeton: Princeton University

Press, 1930; reprint Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979) 37ff; and George E. Ladd, A Theology

of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974) 68-69. See also Herman Ridderbos,

"The Redemptive-Historical Character of Paul's Preaching," When the Time Had Fully

Come: Studies in New Testament Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1957; reprint

Jordan Station, Ontario: Paideia Press, 1982) 4460.

¹⁸See Herman Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 52f.

¹⁹The epoch-making pi<stij, though debated, may be taken as Jesus Christ's faithfulness.

The writer recognizes the difficulty of speaking with certainty whether pi<stij ]Ihsou? Xristou?

(in Paul seven times: Rom 3:22,26; Gal 2:16 [twice]; 3:22; Eph 3:12; Phil 3:9) is a subjective or

objective genitive. However, one must adopt the sense that best fits Paul's argument in Galatians 3.

The following are some reasons for adopting the subjective genitive reading of the phrase: (1) In

other places where Paul uses pi<stij followed by a genitive noun of person the genitive is invariably

subjective-[a] Rom 3:3 – th>n pi<stij tou? qeou? h[; [b] Rom 4:5 pi<stij au]tou? ei]j dikaiosu<nhn;

[c] Rom 4:12 – pi<stewj tou? patro>j h[mw?n ; [d] Rom 4:16 – kai> t&? e]k pi<stewj ]Abraa<m. (2) The

peculiar change of idiom in Gal 2:16 favors the subjective

use over the objective. Gal 2:16 makes a distinction in construction by alternately employing the

prepositions dia</e]k with the genitive to express the faith of Christ and ei]j with the accusative to express

man's belief in Christ [cf. Phil 3:9]. (3) Likewise, Gal 3:22 involves a strange tautology if e]k pi<stewj

]Ihsou? Xristou? is made synonymous with toi?j pisteu<ousin. The tautology reads, ". . . in order

that what was promised, might be given by faith in Jesus

190 TRINITY JOURNAL

B. OT Prediction Is Genuine and Perspicuous

True as it is "that contemporary Jewish exegesis is the proper
background to the church's use of the Old Testament "²¹ the coming
of Christ hermeneutically focuses the church's reading of the OT.
As much as Paul believes that Christ's coming has a great impact
on reading the OT scriptures, emphasis also must be placed on the
corresponding aspect, namely, the anticipatory character of the OT
scriptures. A proper christological reading of the OT does not start
with a confessional creed in need of apologetic support and then go
to the OT scriptures to marshal evidence for it, arbitrarily employ-
ing Jewish appropriation techniques.²² Instead Paul and the other
NT writers read the OT with a belief that the gospel is the end-

Christ to those who believe" (cf. NIV). But it appears evident that Paul deliberately

distinguishes the two expressions to differentiate between the basis upon which the

promise is given and the means by which it is apprehended by individuals. The giving

of the promise is grounded in the obedience/faithfulness of Jesus Christ; it is laid hold

of by belief. Though Paul does not specify an object after the substantival participle

–toi?j pisteu<ousin, the object of belief is nonetheless clearly understood from 2:16

(h[mei?j ei]j Xristo>n ]Ihsou?n e]pisteu<samen). (4) The subjective genitive reading

better fits and puts into bold relief the christological centrality of Paul's argument in Gal 3.

The phrase pi<stij ]Ihsou? Xristou? has attracted many studies. Some more

recent articles endorsing the subjective genitive are: Sam K. Williams, "Again Pistis

Christou," CBQ 49 (1987) 431-47; Richard B. Hays, The Faith of Jesus Christ: An Investigation

of the Narrative Substructure of Galatians 3:1-4:11 (SBLDS 56; Chico, CA: Scholars, 1983)

158-76; Luke Timothy Johnson, "Rom 3:21-26 and the Faith of Jesus," CBQ 44 (1982) 77-90;

Richard N. Longenecker, "The Obedience of Christ," Reconciliation and Hope: New Testament

Essays on Atonement and Eschatology presented to L. L. Morris (ed. by Robert Banks; Grand

Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974) 146ff; George Howard, "The 'Faith of Christ'," ExpTim 85 (1973) 212-14;

D. W. B. Robinson, "'Faith of Jesus Christ' -- a New Testament Debate," The Reformed Theological

Review 29 (1970), 71-81; Markus Barth, "'The Faith of the Messiah'," The Heythrop Journal

10 (1969) 363-70; George Howard, "Notes and Observations on the 'Faith of Christ'," HTR 60 (1967)

459-65; Morna D. Hooker, "PISTIS XRISTOU," NTS 35 (1989) 321-42. Fewer have specifically

written to argue for the objective genitive: Arland J. Hultgren, "The Pistis Christou Formulation

in Paul," NovT 22 (1980) 248-63; C. F. D. Moule, "The Biblical Conception of Faith," ExpTim 68 (1957) 157.

²⁰Cf. several other markers that clearly indicate that Paul's argument is inherently salvation-historical:

"the law, introduced 430 years later;" the law "was added . . . until the Seed . . . had come" (prosete<qh

a@rxij ou$ e@lq^ to> spe<rma [3:19]); "locked up until the faith should be revealed" (sugkleio<menoi ei]j

th>n me<llousan pi<stin ktl. [3:23]); "no longer under the pedagogus " (ou]ke<ti u[po> paidagwgo<j [3:35]).

²¹ Lindars, "Place of the Old Testament," 61.

²² Contrast Ibid, 64. Lindars implies this when he says, "Believing that Christ is the fulfilment of the

promises of God, and that they are living in the age to which all the scriptures refer, they employ the
Old Testament in an ad hoc way, making recourse to it just when and how they find it helpful for their

purposes. But they do this in a highly creative situation, because the Christ-event breaks through

conventional expectations, and demands new patterns of exegesis for its elucidation."

192 TRINITY JOURNAL

tion of faith [e]c a]koh?j pi<stewj]?"²⁸ The first appeal of the apostle's argument may be

summarized: "If you received the charismatic Spirit grounded in the law's demands, the

proclamation of the faith is superfluous. But if the promised Spirit came among you only

as an attendant of the preaching of the gospel and
attesting it, then it is obvious that you are being unsettled by a dif-
ferent gospel."²⁹

Paul's next appeal sets up his third: "If the blessing of Abraham comes to of oi[

e]k pi<stewj, what then is there for those who are oi[ e]c e@rgwn no<mou?"³⁰ To establish

his thesis, that oi[ e]k

²⁸ The contrast which Paul draws is between the messages of two covenants. Based on

evidence supplied by Rom 10:16-17 and 1 Thess 2:13, in the context of Gal 3:2, 5, a]koh< may

best be taken as report or message. Cf. Gerhard Kittel, "a]kou<w—a]koh<," TDNT 1.221; Hans

Dieter Betz, Galatians: A Commentary on Paul's Letter to the Churches in Galatia (Hermeneia;

Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979) 128. Cf. esp. Hays, The Faith of Jesus Christ, 143-49. Those who

take a]koh< in the active sense ("hearing") against the passive sense ("message, report, the thing

preached") frequently follow J. B. Lightfoot, The Epistle of St. Paul to the Galatians (Cambridge:

University Press, 1865; reprint Grand Rapids: Zondervan, n.d.) 135, who argues that it offers "a

better contrast to e@rgwn, which requires some word expressing the part taken by the Galatians

themselves" (Cf. Sam K. Williams, "The Hearing of Faith: AKOH PISTEWS in Galatians 3,"

NTS 35 [1989], 82-93, esp. 86; and Ronald Y. K. Fung, The Epistle to the Galatians [NICNT;

Grand Rapids: Eerdmans 19881 132-33). Lightfoot's argument presumes that the expression e@rga

no<mou primarily has in view "human deeds performed." However, recognition that in Paul e@rga

no<mou is a fuller synonym for no<moj, leads one to conclude that both expressions represent the

old covenant with its demands and sanctions. Cf. Joseph B. Tyson, "'Works of Law' in Galatians,"

JBL 92 (1973) 423-31, esp. 429; Stephen Westerholm, Israel's Law and the Church's Faith (Grand

Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 117, 121. Cf. also Moo, "Law," 90-99. But James D. G. Dunn ("The New

Perspective on Paul," BJRL 65 [1982-831107), restricts e@rga no<mou to circumcision and food laws.

²⁹ Paul's early appeal to the reception of the Spirit remains a central element in his argument, as

it resurfaces in 3:14 and 4:6. To Paul, the age of fulfillment is "the age of the Spirit." Cf. Geerhardus

Vos, "The Eschatological Aspect of the Pauline Conception of the Spirit," Redemptive History and

Biblical Interpretation (ed. Richard B. Gaffin, Jr.; Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed,

1980) 91-125.

³⁰ Paul's two expressions – oi[ e]k pi<stewj and o!soi e]c e@rgwn no<mou ei]si<n -- are frequently

misread as oi[ pisteu<ontej ("the believers") or o!soi pisteu<ousin ("those who believe") and of

oi[ e]rgazo<menoi or oi[ poiou?ntej ta> no<mou ("those who do the things of the law") respectively.

However, both phrases have parallels elsewhere in Paul that suggest that this is an incorrect

understanding. Phrases similar to the former occur in Rom 3:26 (to>n e]k pi<stewj ]Ihsou?) and

Rom 4:16 (t&? e]k pi<stewj), both of which are best taken as subjective genitives. Also, phrases

similar to the second are found in Rom 3:19 (toi?j e]n t&? no<m& lalei?), Rom 4:14 (ei] ga>r oi[ e]k

no<mou klhrono<moi), and in Rom 4:16 (ou] t&? e]k tou? no<mou mo<non). Cf. also other phrases of

this nature: Acts 10:45 (oi[ e]k peritomh?j), Rom 2:8 (toi?j e]c e]riqei<aj), Tit 2:8 (o[ e]c

e]nanti<aj), and Gal 2:12 (tou>j e]k peritomh<j). These phrases, with the construction-substan-

tival article + e]k + the genitive--are appropriately classified by Zerwick. He states, "An important

usage, especially in Paul, is. . . described . . . in the following manner: as we use the ending

<< -ist >> to denote a member of a certain class or party or sect or school of thought (<<socialist,

idealist, pessimist>> etc.), so Paul uses for the same purpose o[ e]k . . ., oi[ e]k. . . etc., with the

genitive of what is the characteristic of the class in question" (Maximilian Zerwick, Biblical

Greek Illustrated by Examples [Rome: Scripta Pontificii Instituti Biblici, 1963] §134).

CANEDAY: DEUT 21:22-23 IN GAL 3:13 193

pi<stewj are the sons of Abraham,³¹ he appeals to Gen 15:6, which

is more than a claim of scriptural support; he claims solidarity

with Abraham, the patriarch held in high regard in Jewish

tradition.³² His citation of Gen 15:6 is followed by his interpreta-

tion (ginw<skete, v. 7) that expresses his thesis. Then Paul

draws his first proof from the "blessing of Abraham" (Gen 12:3;

18:18) that is followed by the logical consecutive w!ste. This pas-

sage leads Paul to assert, oi[ e]k pi<stewj eu]logou?ntai su>n . . .

]Abraa<m (v. 9), the link that prepares for the corresponding oppo-

site, o!soi e]c e@rgwn no<mou ei]sin u[po> kata<ran ei]si<n (v. 10).

In vv. 10-12, the structure is reversed. Here Paul states his
proposition first, followed by the supporting OT citation. In this
way the quotations are not presented as premises leading to conclu-
sions, as in vv. 6-9, but their entrance into the text is to support
assertions. So the introductory formulas to the passages cited have
causal rather than simply consecutive force." Thus Paul intensifies
his argument by asserting two propositions: (1) "Clearly no one is
declared righteous before God e]n no<m&," verified by citing Hab
2:4; and (2) "The law is not e]k pi<stewj, but [a]lla<] 'the one who
does these things shall live in them’" (vv. 11, 12).

These three difficult verses (10-12) have generated volumes of
discussion. For the purpose of this study, only v. 10 will be consid-
ered, since it only is crucial for understanding v. 13. The "blessing"
motif associated with Abraham in vv. 8-9 is now contrasted with
the "cursing" motif connected with the law's sanctions. Therefore,
Paul abruptly states, "As many as are of the demands of the law
are under a curse [u[po> kata<ran]!' To prove his point he cites Deut
27:26 with the causal introductory formula (ge<graptai ga>r o!ti):
"For it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all
the things written in the book of the law to do them.’" It is fre-
quently observed that on the surface Deut 27:26 says the opposite of
what Paul claims.³⁴ This would be true if the expression o!soi e]c
e@rgwn no<mou ei]si<n is read, "'as many as do the works of the

Accordingly, Paul's expressions – oi[ e]k pi<stewj and o!soi e]c e@rgwn no<mou ei]si<n

-- do not identify individuals by their actions but by their orientation either to the old

covenant or the new: "Nomists" or "Gospelists" (i.e., Christians). So, the term nomist,

without connotations of legalism, may best translate o!soi e]c e@rgwn no<mou ei]si<n.

See Longenecker, Paul, 82. Cf. also the term "covenantal nomism" in E. P. Sanders,

Paul and Palestinian Judaism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977) 422f.

³¹ The conclusion to which Paul's thesis progresses is that "to belong to Christ" is

"to be Abraham's seed" (3:29).

³² See the excursus on Abraham in Betz, Galatians, 139-40.

³³ Cf. Gerhard Ebeling, The Truth of the Gospel: An Exposition of Galatians

(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985) 169.

³⁴ See, e.g., Betz, Galatians, 145. Even Luther states, "These two statements, Paul's

and Moses', are in complete conflict. Paul's is: 'Whoever does the works of the Law is

accursed.' Moses' is: 'Whoever does not do the works of the Law is accursed,' How

can these be reconciled? Or (what is more) how can the one be proved on the basis

of the other?" (Lectures on Galatians 1535, Luther's Works, vol. 26 (ed. Jaraslav

Pelikan; St. Louis: Concordia, [1963]252).

194 TRINITY JOURNAL

law."³⁵ This mistaken reading creates the first problem for inter-
preting Paul's use of Deut 27:26. The second problem is generated be-
cause Paul's warrant for selecting Deut 27:26 to prove his assertion
is generally submerged in the morass of interpretations offered.
With regard to the first problem, as long as one reads o!soi e]c

e@rgwn no<mou ei]si<n as suggesting "doing the law," "relying upon

the law," or similar ideas of human action, one begins down a path

Paul's argument does not go. For example, Dunn argues that e@rga

no<mou essentially consist of keeping commandments concerning cir-

cumcision, the food laws, and the sabbath, i.e., wearing badges of

covenantal identity." He clarifies his interpretation: "Yet once

more we must note that it is works of the law that Paul disparages,

not the law itself or law-keeping in general."³⁷ He opens himself up

to Raisanen's criticism: "Dune thus presents a new version of an old

thesis: what Paul attacks is not the law as such or as a whole, but

just the law as viewed in some particular perspective, a particular

attitude to the law, or some specific (mis-)understanding of it."³⁸

There are two problems with such an approach. First, it fails to

recognize that o!soi is linked with it e]c e@rgwn no<mou by the copu-

lative ei]mi< to denote "belonging to" (BAGD, 225),³⁹ and is not des-

ignated as performing action upon the law. Second, it fails to ac-

count for the fact that what is required to redeem from the curse is

the epoch-making death of Christ.⁴⁰ In contrast, understanding o!soi

e]c e@rgwn no<mou ei]si<n to mean "as many as are nomists (i.e.,

identify with the old covenant)," observes Paul's equation of e@rga<

no<mou with no<moj and allows for the true impact of the redemp-

tive-historical act of Christ (3:13) in relation to the law.

A solution to the second problem must be summarized. Paul's

logic is plain enough: "As many as are nomists are under a curse, for

it is written, "Cursed is everyone who fails to do all that the law

requires."' The text cited is part of the sanctions of the old coven-

ant. The deuteronomical conception of the curse of the law, being

cast in terms of sanctions of a suzerainty treaty between king and

vassal nation,⁴¹ does not atomize the curse to individuals distinct

³⁵But see the discussion above in note 30.

³⁶ Dunn, "The New Perspective on Paul," BJRL 65 (1982-83)110f.

³⁷ Ibid., 117. It is in this context that he criticizes Sanders who "keeps taking

the phrase 'works of the law' as though it was simply a fuller synonym for 'law.'"

³⁸ Heikki Raisanen, "Galatians 2:16 and Paul's Break with Judaism," NTS 31 (1985),

544 (italics original). The same criticism may be applied to H. J. Schoeps, Paul: The

Theology of the Apostle in the Light of Jewish Religious History (Philadelphia:

Westminster, 1961) 176-77; Bruce, Galatians, 157-60; C. E. B. Cranfield, "St. Paul

and the Law," SJT 17 (1964) 43-68; Daniel Fuller, Gospel and Law: Contrast or

Continuum? (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 87ff..

³⁹Cf. Zerwick, Biblical Greek, §134.

⁴⁰ Cf. Dunn, "Works of the Law and the Curse of the Law (Galatians 3:10-14),"

NTS 31 (1985) 536: "The curse which was removed therefore by Christ's death was

. . . the curse of a wrong understanding of the law."

⁴¹ See Meredith G. Kline, Treaty of the Great King: The Covenant Structure of

Deuteronomy (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1963), 121ff and 13-44.

CANEDAY: DEUT 21:22-23 IN GAL 3:13 195

from identity with the covenant nation. The individual within the
nation was treated as a member of the covenant people until such a

time that his conduct violated the covenant. Then the nation was to

act as a community to punish the offender (Deut 13:9f).

Paul's citation evidently draws upon the LXX text-type, but it

conflates two texts, perhaps Deut 27:26 and 28:61. His inclusion of

toi?j gegramme<noij e]n t&? bibli<& tou? no<mou suggests that Paul

does not intend his citation of Deut 27:26 to be restricted to the

twelve curses of 27:15-26, but to include all the curses spoken to

Israel (27:15-28:68). The curse of Deut 27:26 had special reference to

the covenant-breaker, for it -vas pronounced at the close of a

covenant-renewal ceremony.

The citation of Deut 27:26, conflated with 28:61, both proves

the proposition of 3:10a and prepares for 3:13, redemption from the

curse. Reading the OT from his controlling hermeneutical axioms,

established by fulfillment in Christ, Paul sees Israel's history un-

der the law typologically⁴² as a monument of human unfaithfulness

now, in view of the faithfulness of the "New Israel," i.e., "the

Seed" who is Christ (Gal 3:16). Because the covenant was tribal by

nature, it inflicted its sanctions upon all when the covenant was vi-

olated by its fathers and leaders.⁴³ Therefore, the nation's disloyalty

incurred the curse of the law which enveloped God's covenant

people for centuries, including the remnant which cried out to

Yahweh for deliverance from the curse⁴⁴ and for "the redemption of

Jerusalem" (Luke 2:38, cf. 2:25).

Thus, since the coming of Christ, for the Galatians to seek

adoption as Abraham's sons by becoming nomists, is to join them-

selves to the old nation, Israel, which is subjected to the curse of the

violated covenant. The history of Israel's covenant unfaithfulness

cries out for a "new Israel" who is faithful to Yahweh and from

whom blessing spills out upon all who are identified with him.

Verse 13 breaks upon the darkened scene of the broken and vio-

lated covenant, which holds its curse over all its subjects. One may

expect from Paul's strong deprecation of the law in 3:12a that he

would say, Xristo>j h[ma?j e]chgo<rasen e]k tou? no<mou, as he more

nearly does in 4:5a. However, Paul has argued that the law's curse

looms over Israel, and he recognizes that the law demands satisfac-

tion in order for the curse to be lifted from God's people. Conse-

quently, he states instead, "Christ redeemed us from the curse of

the law, having become a curse in our place" (Xristo>j h[ma?j e]ch-

⁴² See e.g. Douglas J. Moo, "Israel and Paul in Romans 7.7-12," NTS 32 (1986) 122-35; Mark

W. Karlberg, "Israel's History Personified: Romans 7:7-13 in Relation to Paul's Teaching on the

'Old Man,"' TrinJ NS 7 (1986) 65-74; idem, "The Significance of Israel in Biblical Theology,"

JETS 31 (1988) 257-69.

⁴³Thus the proverb, "The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on

edge" (Jer 31:29). Contrast the new cov