Covenants Human and Divine: Paul's argumentum a minore ad maius in Gal 3:15-17 and Its Relevance to Gal 3-4

This dissertation concerns the crux interpretum of Gal 3:15–17, a text whose rhetorical function hinges on the meaning of the ambiguous term diathēkē, which can refer both to revocable dispositions of property (last will and testament) and immutable pledges (covenants). The majority of commentators understand Paul’s proof as playing on the dual senses of diathēkē, deriving the irrevocability of the Abrahamic covenant (Gal 3:17) from that ostensibly accorded human testaments (Gal 3:15). In contrast to this majority view, I contend that the argumentum a minore ad maius proof of vv. 15–17 operates primarily within the conceptual and semantic domain of covenant, though he moves to metaphors of inheritance in Gal 3:24–4:7. I support this contention by undertaking an extensive analysis of the literary and papyrological evidence for ancient testamentary practices and procedures, as well as the references to and discussions of covenants in the Old Testament and Second Temple materials. This study further demonstrates that Paul’s movement between the metaphorical complexes of covenant and inheritance is facilitated by distinctive features of the Septuagint text of the biblical narratives (especially Gen 15) that Paul evokes. In addition to clarifying a notoriously difficult passage and elucidating Paul’s overarching argument in Gal 3–4, this study contributes to the ongoing scholarly debates over the ways in which Paul was both a conventional and exceptional thinker within Second Temple Judaism. Moreover, this dissertation also constitutes a hermeneutical intervention, as my analyses illuminate how interpreters identify and negotiate the transparency and ambiguity of written texts, as well as how historians can effectively evaluate the available forms of evidence (literary, papyrological, etc.) in reconstructing the earliest meanings and functions of the proto-Christian literature