Not My People: Gentiles as Exiles in Pauline Hermeneutics

Written by David I. Starling Reviewed By John Anthony Dunne

Not My People is a study on one particular aspect of Paul's hermeneutics, namely, his interpretation of OT passages about Israel's experience of exile that are applied to a Gentile audience. This study is the published dissertation of David I. Starling, a lecturer in New Testament at Morling College. The key passages discussed are (1) Isa 54:1 in Gal 4:27, (2) the conflated scriptural citation in 2 Cor 6:16-18, (3) Hos 1:10; 2:23 in Rom 9:25-26, and (4) Isa 57:19 in Eph 2:17.

Starling begins by surveying various issues related to Paul's use of Scripture before interacting with a few of the major methodologies for intertextuality as advocated by Richard Hays, Francis Watson, and Christopher Stanley. After addressing these approaches, Starling explains his own developed methodology that he employs in the project. Each chapter follows the same basic pattern, according to Starling's methodology. After introducing the passage, Starling explores the extant Jewish interpretations of the OT text(s) in question within the Second Temple period, surveys and critiques proposed solutions to the problematic Pauline citation, addresses how the OT is used elsewhere in the particular letter under discussion (the 'hermeneutical framework'), and looks at how Paul addresses the story of Israel in the same letter before offering his own interpretation and solution to the problem.

In the passages that Starling explores, it could be suggested that Paul is using the OT texts atomistically without regard for the context about Israel in exile. Yet Starling demonstrates how Paul's hermeneutics fit within the purpose of the letter in question in a manner that provides satisfying results. Starling contends that by applying these passages to his Gentile audience, Paul believes that Gentiles do not enter the people of God by living like Israel, under the law, but like exiled Israel.

On the use of Isa 54:1 in Gal 4:27, it is clear that the passage about the end of Israel's exile is applied to Paul's Gentile audience (cf. Gal 4:28). From passages like Gal 3:10-14, it is apparent that Paul presents Israel in the same predicament of exile. As Starling states, “Paul depicts himself and his fellow-Israelites as having inherited not the blessings of the law but its curses, standing in Gentile shoes and (either literally or metaphorically) on Gentile soil” (p. 60). Thus, given the Jewish predicament of exile, by applying Isa 54:1 to Gentiles, Paul is claiming that both groups are “in exile” and in need of “justification by faith and not works of the law.” Starling rightly notes that the context of exile is important for interpreting Galatians, though I would add that there is a more immediately pressing issue for why Paul chose Isa 54:1. Just as the end of exile spoken of in Isa 54:1 is predicated upon the exilic suffering of Isa 53, so also the citation of Isa 54:1 is a vision of hope in the midst of the Galatians' suffering. This is seen from Paul's immediate comments on this passage (Gal 4:29) and the focus on suffering and persecution elsewhere (Gal 1:13, 23; 3:4; 4:13, 19; 5:11; 6:12, 17).

In the next chapter, Starling addresses the scriptural catena in 2 Cor 6:16-18. Starling demonstrates that the conflated citation should be interpreted along the salvation-historical trajectory of 2 Cor 1:20-22, which states that Christ is the “yes” to all of God's promises. The most significant aspect of this chapter is that Starling provides a strong case for two disputed facts about this conflated citation: (1) the originality of this text in 2 Corinthians and (2) Pauline authorship of this section.

Then in chapter four, which focuses on the Paul's use of Hosea in Rom 9:25-26, the same application of an exiled Israel passage can be situated in a context where the plight of Jews and Gentiles are made equal (cf. Rom 3:22). Thus, the logic is that God indeed accepts Gentiles because he accepts Israel in her transgressed state after the covenant had been breached: “Gentiles can become 'my people' because Israel has first become 'not my people'” (p. 164).

Chapter five focuses on the use of Isa 57:19 in Eph 2:17. Just as in the previous examples, both Jews and Gentiles are presented as being in the same plight through the language of “near” and “far,” though originally this referred to Jews in the land and Jews in the diaspora respectively. Gentiles are included in this promise because “the predicament of exile” corresponds to their disposition as “spiritually dead and far off from God” (p. 193). Given that Ephesians is one of the disputed letters in the Pauline corpus, Starling demonstrates in this chapter that hermeneutics cannot be the ground for denying Pauline authorship, since he discerns a similar hermeneutical pattern. This is a welcome implication as I have offered treatments on Ephesians and hermeneutics elsewhere with Jonathan M. Lunde on the use of Ps 68 in Eph 4:8 (WTJ 74:1) and the use of Isaiah in Eph 5:14 (JETS 55.1).

Starling then has an extensive conclusion with a summary of his findings as well as a discussion on the implications of his study. These implications are primarily that (1) Paul's use of Scripture evinces a (complex, not simple) continuity with salvation history and (b) both Gentiles and Jews experience the same plight and are equally in need of grace and life.

Overall, Starling's study provides impressive research on a fascinating phenomenon in the Pauline corpus. Starling succeeds in demonstrating that this unique feature of Paul's hermeneutics-the application of passages about exiled Israel to Gentiles-has a consistent and coherent logic. Not My People is highly commended for those interested in Paul's letters as well as intertextuality broadly.


John Anthony Dunne

John Anthony Dunne
St Mary’s College, University of St Andrews
St Andrews, Scotland, UK

Other Articles in this Issue

Children's story bibles are not Bibles and, it turns out, neither are they for children...

This article is written in love and admiration for pastors in North America...

As I write this the UK Parliament is considering Clause 1(1) of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill...

I shall begin with a well-known exegetical conundrum and then branch out to a much larger issue that none of us can afford to ignore...