Page 6

In this imminent divine retribution view, anathema is a curse, the relegation or handing over of the

offender to God's retribution. The traditional phraseology of "devotion to God's judgment" is appropriate
when understood not as an optative or as Paul's wish, but as a true curse. Paul is actively referring the
offender to God, the divine judge, for his judicial decision. Doskocil argues this when he states,

Wir haben keine Veranlassung, die sachliche Bedeutung des anathema in irgendeiner Form
abzuschwächen. Es steht auch hier in der vollen Wucht seiner urtümlichen Bedeutung, von der
Auslieferung an den "Richterzorn Gottes."

The outcome of Paul's decision has already been revealed in the pattern of the Old Testament as discussed
in the eschatological view above.

Second, by imminent retribution, I mean near or potentially immediate. The anathematized could

experience divine retribution in this life

just as they could experience God's blessings in this life (i.e., Gal

6:16). It could be in some sense the fulfillment of deuteronomistic curses: the removal of God's blessing and
even death. At that point eschatological retribution would take place. Behnisch argues that it is a prophetic
sentence, the curse-condition of salvationless death.

In other words, there is an eschatological quality to

this anathema, since the Galatians had already experienced the salvation power of the gospel. Therefore, it
carries the weight of "eschatological horror,"

a fear of the ultimate consequence. This imminency fits with

Ezra 10:8 and the process undertaken by Ezra due to his fear of God's imminent retribution on the
community for idolatrous intermarriages (cf. Num 25:1-13; Josh 6:18; 7:1, 11-12).

Third, divine retribution is a consistent theme throughout the Old and New Testaments. More

specifically, to rob God of his honor in favor of false gods and/or false doctrine, automatically results in his
retribution, or as Morland suggests his "divine sanctions."

The focus of !rj/ajnavqema as devotion to

destruction of seducers appears to be what sets it apart from other curse terms. This is especially significant
in light of Paul's usage of katavra and ejpikatavratoî in Galatians 3:8-14. Though generally related to
violations of the divine covenant and laws,

ajnavqema is not used as a general "all purpose" curse that men

and women curse each other with like katavra (Matt 5:44; Luke 6:28; Rom 12:14; Jas 3:9, 10). The
concept of curses bearing divine physical judgments upon nature and livelihood like in the Deuteronomy 27-
30 cursings and blessings are absent from !rj/ajnavqema judgments (cf. also Mark 11:21). jAnavqema is
more related to Deuteronomy 13:12-18 type discipline of seducers than anything else.

Further support for a relegation and imminent view is when Paul appears to curse others.

There

are instances when Paul concludes the controversies with opponents who put the church in fundamental
danger with a short and pointed statement of judgment.

For example, in Rom 3:8, he declares that "their

judgment (krivma or condemnation) is just (e[ndikovn or deserved)" upon those who have slandered Paul and
his companions (cf. Rom 6:1-2). In 2 Corinthians 11:15b, Paul describes his Corinthian opponents as "false
apostles," "whose end will be according to their deeds" (NIV, "what their actions deserve"). In Philippians
3:18, 19a, he declares that the "end" (tevloî?) of "the enemies of the cross" will be "destruction"
(ajpwvleia). Later, in Gal 5:10b, he declares, "The one who is disturbing (or confusing) you will heavily bear
(bastavsei) judgment (krivma)." Behnisch is correct in observing that although there is a formal difference
between these pronouncements and the technical curses of the anathemas in Gal 1:8-9 and 1 Cor 16:22,
they are functionally related. They are all "pronouncements of divine judgment caused by a falsification of
the gospel, which Paul understands as an elementary threat to the spiritual reality of his congregation."

goes on to assert correctly,

These sentences are clearly more than mere accusations of the opponent and more than a reference
to possible bad consequences of wrongdoing. Rather, the stereotyped saying of the apostle tells the
heretics, like a prophet, of the intervention of God in advance, and makes that course of action an
eschatological judgment already active.