Paul the Outlaw 

I. The Context (See Dr. Mark's Chronology, 55 C.E.)

 

II. The Rhetorical Situation: The proclamation of a "perverted" form of the gospel message

III. The Rhetorical Response: A Defense of the Message and the Messenger

A. Introduction (proem) and Thesis (propositio) in 1:6-12

1. Paul's astonishment at their turning to a different, perverted, human gospel

 

2. Paul's curse on any who preach a different gospel

 

3. Implied Thesis: "There is no other gospel than the one revealed to me, and I'm going to prove it!"

 

B. Arguments (probatio)

1. First Heading (1:11 - 2:21): The gospel is proven by Paul's experience:

a. Of receiving a gospel given by the risen Christ, not (a) man (1:11 - 24)

 

b. Of successfully defending the gospel he proclaims at the Jerusalem conference (2:1-10)

 

c. Of successfully(?) opposing the circumcision party and Peter in Antioch (2:11-17; cf. James 2:14-26)

 

d. Of personally realizing the priority of Faith over Law (2:18-21)

 

 

2. Second Heading (3:1 - 5:1): The gospel is proven by the Galatians' experience:

a. Of the Spirit (3:1-5)

 

b. Of the blessing of Abraham (3:6-29)

 

c. Of going from slaves to sons (4:1 - 5:1)

 

C. Conclusion (epilogue) in 5:2 - 6:18: "The only thing that counts is faith working through love"

IV. Paul's Shocking Declarations and Insinuations about the Law of God

A. The Law puts people under a curse (3:10-14)

B. The Law of God may not be entirely "of God" (3:19-20; 4:1-11)

C. The Law is a jailor/disciplinarian/slave master (3:22-26; 4:21-31 will be discussed in a later lecture)

 

D. "Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision are anything" (5:6; 6:15)

 

E. How would the Law-observant Jerusalem church react to rhetoric like this? (Acts 21:15-28)

 

V. Did Paul Get a Little Carried Away with his Rhetoric?