The Relationship of Jewish and Gentile Believers to the Law Between A.D. 30 and 70 in the Scripture

197 ntOTEW<;, oOTot ulo( datv' A~paaµ . " Normally the phrase ol EK n(aTEw<; is interpreted according to the emphasis in 3:6 upon Abraham's believing (EntaTEuaEv ) as "those who believe. " 153 If however Paul does not key his thoughts from Abraham's response , but rather from the promise he received then perhaps the phrase should be understood differently. In reality the best option to interpret the phrase is to understand it as a shortened version of the phrase Paul has just used in 3:5, ES aKofj<; nfaTEw<;, so that it means "those who are of the faithfulness" or "those who are of the gospel" of Messiah. This is likely because the concept of n(an<; was introduced and defined before the reference to Abraham in 3:6. It has already been argued that Paul can use the noun without genitival qualifiers to refer to the fuller expression EK n(aTEw<; 'I flOOO Xp taToO (3 :22-26) because he has already qualified them, not only in 3 :2, 5 but also in 2: 16. 154 Thus, Paul's phrase in 3 :7, 9 should understood as a natural extension of his antithesis between those who would identify with Moses or those who would _, identify with the gospel message. This harmonizes with Paul's strategy already discussed, in Galatians 3 that "those who are of the faithfulness (i.e., of Christ) are the sons of Abraham (3:7, 29). 155 This understanding is reinforced by an investigation of Paul 's argument in 3: , 9. It is difficult to see how the quotation from Genesis 12:3 supports Paul's argument if hi point is the necessity of faith . The passage speaks of Gentiles and their ble ing but nowhere doe it 153 Burton, Galatians, 155. 154 ordon, "The ri i at Galatia," 37. "Paul can abbre iat th n , ub tituting the horthand of "faith" and "work " in an unqualified m nn r. hi i b au he ha already qualifi d them. Later, when he p ak of 'faith ," h d n t p ak ab ut th human, 1 t ntial capa ity to tru t but b ut faith in 'hri t . Ibid . ur e of th L and th e t rm m ao( ( . ) nd ot l n(aT we; ( th u m anmg on Paul ' , ho! argument in 2. 15 f; . 16, 3. 13 14 ," 1 1 ( mpha I ' mine) . n th t 'Th , ), and the depend for - 9," Don ld n , "