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

209 The Proposition (Propositio) 2: 15-21 The purpose of the propositio is to sum up the narratio 's material content and to set up the arguments to be discussed later in the probatio (chapters 3 and 4). 176 This section does just that as it serves one hand to answer the problem in Antioch, setting out Paul's argument in summary form, and thus prepares the way for his fuller exposition of the argument in 3: 1-4:31. Paul articulates the two "gospels" here in summary form which he only mentioned in his introduction. Paul acknowledges the distinction between Jew and Gentile in 2: 15-16; Jews possess and obey the Law while Gentiles do not. This advantage, however, does not lead to acceptance with God. That only comes through the One who is completely acceptable to God , Jesus Christ. Thus, even Jews find justification not in the observance of the Law but by personal faith in the faithfulness of Christ (2: 16). Thus, Paul's and Peter 's acceptance comes ' .,. "in Christ" (8tKatw817vm lv XptcrTQ, 2: 17). The problem comes when it is realized , however, that they are not alone "in Christ," for Gentiles find their blessing in the same place, making Jew and Gentile "one in Christ" (3:28). Thus when Peter was properly expressing his acceptance "in Christ" at the table with others who were "in Christ," certain Jews objected that Christ was causing Peter to sin by exposing himself to Gentile uncleanne (2: 17). Paul's response is that the real transgression in this matter is to rebuild the barrier of the law between Jew and Gentile which are "in Christ" (2: 18) . Paul ha found within the la Studies in Paul and John: The onversation Continues : In Honor of J . Loui Martyn , ed . Robert T . Fortna, and Beverly R . Gaventa (Abingdon Pre : Na h ille, 1990) , 170- To put this in literary per pective, Paul ' point in the te t i n t to argue ith P t r for ht equivocation concerning di t or hi p r onal tance toward the la (for n ith r ar mentioned) but for hi ambival nee to ard a ociating ith ntil and hi final t n which "forced" th m to b com Je in rder to b ept d . 176 Bet , a/atian , 114.