“The Judeo-Christians faction, which maintains strict observance, asserts that the Christ-event does not abolish the old order. Its conception of the subject is dialectical. It is not a question of denying the power of the event. It is a question of asserting that its novelty conserves and sublates the traditional site of faith, that it incorporates it by exceeding it. The Christ-event accomplishes the Law; it does not terminate it. Thus the marks inherited from tradition (circumcision, for example) are still necessary. One might even say that, taken up and elevated by the new announcement, the latter become transfigured and are all the more active for it.”
– Badiou, Saint Paul, pg. 22-23.
This statement by Badiou is at the heart of his view of Paul’s gospel. He makes great pains to bifurcate the event (in this case, Christ’s resurrection) from its evental site (basically, ancient Judaism). He says that the event is non-dialectical. It neither signifies nor negates anything. In Badiou’s own terms, the event is simply indifferent to its site.
As far as the realm of discontinuity between lawand gospel is concerned, I find Badiou’s words to be enlightening. He eventually goes on to use the “indifference to difference” model begun here to explain Paul’s pragmatism in Romans 14, and I believe that there is much for us to glean from this exposition.