Galatians/Introduction/Commentary

Galatians Introduction

“Like many great writings, it is comparatively brief. Ten double space typewritten pages adding up to about three thousand words, but what words! Its widest field of usefulness, however, is afforded by conditions of the present day. Wherever religion has lost its reality, wherever ritual is more regarded than right living, wherever subscription to a creed is substituted for submission to Christ, wherever loud claims of orthodoxy are accompanied by conduct devoid of charity there this epistle should be made to sound out its clarion call”. 1 “But this letter is not one with a message simply for those of centuries earlier than ours, nor is it an Epistle that can be read in comfortable detachment without personal involvement. At every point it challenges our present-day shallow, easy acceptances and provokes our opposition.

It was a controversial letter; and it is vain to expect any commentator, however humble, to avoid controversy when expounding it--especially when the issues are just as alive today”. 2  Authorship: It is clearly stated as one of Paul's letters (Galatians 1:1; 5:2). In addition, a tremendous amount of "personal" information is found in the letter that points to Paul as being the human author (1:12-2:21, especially 2:8). “The Church has always believed that the Apostle Paul wrote the Epistle to the Galatians. Except for one or two extremely radical scholars, no one has ever attacked the genuineness of Galatians, that is, that the letter came from the Apostle Paul. Most radical critics have agreed not only to Pauline characteristics but also Pauline authorship.

Everyone admits that, if there ever lived a man like Paul who is known from other books he wrote, then, Galatians must have come from him. The external testimony of the ancient church leaders to the Pauline authorship of Galatians is unambiguous.

1 The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians. Charles R. Erdman, Preface and Forward.

2 Tyndale N.T. Commentaries. 'The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians', Alan Cole p. 11) 1

One of the earliest, Clement of Rome, refers to the letter in his writings. Polycarp and Barnabas knew of Galatians, as did Hermas and Ignatius. Even Maricon, who excluded entire blocks of the NT writings from his early canon, placed the letter on his choice list and refers to it by title.” 3  Audience: “The Roman province of Galatia derived its name from the Gauls, who early in the third century before Christ, invaded north central Asia Minor and established an independent kingdom”. 4 “Gradually the Gallic population was absorbed into the other peoples living there, and after a number of political changes, the territory became the property of Rome in 25 B.C. Galatia (1:2) then under Roman rule, could mean Galatian proper, which the Gauls had founded, or it could be applied to the whole province which included the southern cities of Antioch, Iconium, Derbe and Lystra.”. 5 “Certain tribes of Gauls, as Frenchmen were then called, moved by their restless, conquest-loving spirit, and by the pressure of rival tribes at home, invaded to the southeastward and attempted to overrun Greece. Being repulsed at Delphi, they crossed the Bosphorus, and, after many conflicts were finally content to confine themselves to this territory. Though speaking Greek, they also retained their language, so that Jerome leads us to believe that a Galatian and a Frenchman could have conversed together with ease as late as the Fourth Century A.D. Though a part of the Celtic race, which includes the French, Welsh, Irish and Scotch, they were Frenchmen, and their characteristics are described by Julius Caesar, who says, ‘The infirmity of the Gauls is that they are fickle in their resolves and fond of change, and not to be trusted’”. 6  Northern and Southern “Galatian” Views: “The term Galatia was used in a double sense during this period of time. On the one hand, it described the more limited area in the northern section of the Province of Galatia in which the Gauls had settled (including the cities of Ancyra, Pessinus and Tavium) and, on the other hand, it described the entire Roman Province, including 3 'Galatians, Encyclopedia of the 4 New Testament 5 New Testament 6 Commentary on Romans. By McGarvey

Epistle To', Zondervan Pictorial Bible. Volume D-G, pp. 627-628 Times. Merrill C. Tenney p. 240 Survey. Merrill C. Tenney p. 265 Thessalonians, Corinthians, Galatians and and Pendleton p. 245 2

the cities of Antioch, Lystra, Derbe and Iconium. The problem which this dual usage raises for answering the question, ‘To whom was the epistle addressed?’ should be obvious. Did Paul use the term ‘Galatia’ in its provincial or in its ethnic sense?” 7 The Northern Galatian View: This viewpoint argues that in Acts 16:6-7, Paul had turned 300 miles north to establish churches in the area of Ancyra, Pessinus and Tavium, and that the second visit to this region is recorded in Acts 18:23. “According to this theory, the book of Galatians was written while Paul was at Ephesus or shortly thereafter, possibly while he was at Corinth (Acts 19:1ff; 20:2)” (Willis p. xiii). Hence around 55-57 A.D. The strongest arguments for the Northern Galatian View are as follows:  The use of the term Galatia in Acts 16:6 and 18:23, where Lightfoot argues that Luke was speaking of divisions described primarily in ethnic rather than in provincial terms. “He observes that since Phrygia is the name given to a division of land occupied by a national group, Galatia must equally refer to another, and consequently would be used exclusively of the Gallic north” (N.T. Times. Tenney p. 241). Yet Tenney also observes, “Whether the Lukan and Pauline usages of these terms coincided exactly or not, both referred to the same general region included within the bounds of the Roman province of Galatia (which included the southern region)” (N.T. Survey p. 266).  The character of the Galatian people. “Lightfoot for example, wrote, ‘The main features of the Gaulish character are traced with great distinctiveness by the Roman writers. Quickness of apprehension, great impressibility, an eager craving after knowledge. Inconstant and quarrelsome, treacherous in their dealings, incapable of sustained effort. Fickleness is the term used to express their temperament’. Willis responds, 'However, the objection that these traits are not limited to any one group of people (they seem true of the Corinthians too) seems effectively to offset Lightfoot's contention” (p. xiii). “But it is evident that these characterizations apply to Paul's words only if the bulk of the churches were made up of actual Celts. Any congregation even in Upper Galatia would include a mixed population and probably have but few Celts.

Paul's words are such as fit any church in which heresies had secured a hold in 7

Truth Commentaries. Galatians. Mike Willis p. xi 3

a comparatively brief time”. 8  The North Galatian theory is the oldest theory: “The church fathers generally accepted the view that the churches intended were those of the ethnic group of North Galatia. However, was probably due to the fact that after 72 A.D. the borders of Galatia were diminished so that the southern Galatian territory was no longer considered part of Galatia. Scholars probably accepted without examination the view that this was always the case” (Willis p. xiv).

The Southern Galatian View:  Paul customarily uses the provincial term: “Paul apparently preferred the provincial titles, as when he wrote of the churches of Macedonia (2 Corinthians 8:1), Asia (1 Corinthians 16:19), and Achaia (2 Corinthians 1:1)” (Willis p. xiv).  “It is hard to see what common name Paul could have used to cover Pisidians, Lycaonians, and so forth, other than the provincial name of Galatians.

Indeed, Paul usually uses the name of the Roman province in which churches are situated when he wants to describe them collectively, 1 Corinthians 16:19 is a good parallel” (Cole pp. 18-19).  A big problem with the Northern view is that if this book was written to Christians in the North, then there is not a letter written to the churches that Paul established on his first tour (Acts 13-14), and revisited (Acts 15:41-16:1; Acts 18:23). In fact, Peter specifically writes to the churches in the northern regions of Asia Minor (1 Peter 1:1).  The mention of Barnabas: (Galatians 2:1,13). If the Southern view is true, then this reference makes perfect sense. Barnabas had labored with Paul in establishing the congregations in the South (Acts 13:2ff). “On the other hand, if the Northern Galatian theory is true, the churches in that area would have had no known occasion to be acquainted with Barnabas. He and Paul did not labor together during Paul's second and third missionary journeys, yet this 8 The Interpretation of St. Paul's Epistles to Galatians, Ephesians, and Philippians. R.C.H. Lenski p. 13 4

was the time frame during which these congregations were established according to the North Galatian theory” (Wills p. xvi). See Acts 15:39-41.  We know that the Galatian churches had been instructed concerning the collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem (1 Corinthians 16:1-4). In Acts 20:4 we have at least one messenger from the Southern Galatian region (“Gaius of Derbe”), of course Timothy was from that region as well, yet we have absolutely no messengers mentioned from the Northern Galatian territory.  Paul had preached to the Galatians prior to the confrontation in Jerusalem (Acts 15), because Galatians 2 is either the famine visit of Acts 11:30 or another view of the events found in Acts 15. Yet according to the Northern view, Paul does not even preach in this region until Acts 16:6-7. This argument is really the clincher, because Paul had preached to these people prior to Acts 15 (Galatians 2:5 “might remain with you”).

The Date: The Question of Galatians Chapter 2: Obviously this book was not written prior to the events described in Galatians chapter 2. The question is, which visit to Jerusalem by Paul and Barnabas does Galatians chapter 2 describe? The visit of Acts 11:30 or the visit of Acts 15?

Galatians 2 and Acts 15 refer to the same event: On the surface this view seems to fit better, especially when we consider the subject matter of both chapters. 1. False brethren (Galatians 2:4; Acts 15:1). 2. No compromise from Paul or Barnabas (Galatians 2:5; Acts 15:1-2). 3. The controversy in both chapters is over the subject of circumcision (Galatians 2:3; Acts 15:1).

Galatians 2 and Acts 11:30; 12:25 are the same event: This seems to fit the order of events better. Tenney gives the following chronology: The Resurrection of Christ/Acts 2

29 A.D.

5

Conversion of Paul at Damascus/Acts 9 Visit to Arabia (Galatians 1:17)

31 A.D.

Paul's first visit to Jerusalem/Acts 9:26 15 days with Peter (Galatians 1:18)

33 A.D.

Departure to Syria and Cilicia/Acts 11:25ff Preaching in Antioch with Barnabas (Galatians 1:21) Second Visit to Jerusalem/Acts 11:30;12:25

46 A.D.

First Missionary Journey/Acts 13-14 Return to Antioch/Acts 14:21-28 **This is where Tenney places the visit of Peter and his hypocrisy recorded in Galatians 2:11ff.

Council of Jerusalem/Acts 15

48-49 A.D.

The Galatians 2 and Acts 15 refer to the same event view would place the letter about 51 A.D. and Galatians 2 refers to Acts 11:30 view would place it about 48 A.D., and hence the first letter that Paul wrote.

“The vacillation of Peter between eating with the Gentiles at Antioch and withdrawal from their company when Jewish Christians appeared (Galatians 2:10ff) seems much more likely to have occurred before the Council (Acts 15) then afterwards. Had the relation of Christian Gentiles been already settled, he could scarcely have been so uncertain of his own position. Galatians 2:11-13 shows that the Judaizers in Antioch had succeeded in influencing temporarily both Peter and Barnabas, and that Paul had rebuked Peter sharply for his inconsistent conduct. The episode in Antioch must have preceded the Council at Jerusalem, since at the later Peter staunchly defended Paul's position, and characterized the Law as ‘a yoke...which neither we nor our fathers were able to bear’ (Acts 15:10). It is hardly conceivable that Peter would have abandoned a publicly avowed position soon after he had taken it, though he could have vacillated in practice after a private agreement” (New Testament Times. pp. 246,247). This argument sounds good but is not completely convincing. In Galatians 2 Peter is not uncertain of his position, 6

rather he is intimidated. In addition, just because one has taken a stand does not mean that they cannot compromise later.

The Opposition in Galatia: From the text of this letter we learn that Paul's opponents: 1. Insinuated that Paul was not really a true apostle, or that he was the "errand boy" for the true apostles in Jerusalem (1:2,11-24; 2:1-11). 2. Were preaching a different gospel (1:6-9), which included the teaching that one must be circumcised (5:1), and observe the Law of Moses to be saved (3:2,5,10). 3. Argued that Paul was inconsistent, that is, he preached for and against circumcision (5:11). 4. These false teachers seem motivated by a desire to avoid persecution from non-Christian Jews (6:12).

Themes:  Freedom in Christ: (2:4; 5:1-4) “So Galatians was written by a champion of freedom who saw that neither Gentiles nor Jews could be delivered from their sins by self-effort. Galatians accordingly has been called the ‘Magna Charta of spiritual emancipation’ (Galatians 3:13-14)” (New Testament Survey. Tenney p. 265). Yet this liberty is not a license to sin (Galatians 5:19-21). Neither is this a liberty that allows us to make up our own rules for salvation (Galatians 5:1-4). We understand that grace does not cancel out the need for personal responsibility.  The One True Gospel: (1:6-9; 2:2,5,14). This is the same gospel which was partially revealed to Abraham (3:8).

John Stott makes the following comments: “The lesson which stands out from this paragraph is that there is only one gospel. The popular view is that there are many different ways to God, that the gospel changes with the changing years, and that you must not condemn the gospel to fossilization in the first century A.D. But Paul would not endorse these notions. This is the fundamental test. Anybody who rejects the apostolic gospel, no matter who we may be, is himself to be rejected (1:9). We are not to be dazzled, as many people are, by the person, gifts of office of teachers in the church. They may come to us with great dignity, authority and scholarship. They may be bishops or archbishops, university professors or even the 7

pope himself. But if they bring a gospel other than the gospel preached by the apostles and recorded in the New Testament, they are to be rejected. We judge them by the gospel; we do not judge the gospel by them. As Dr. Alan Cole expresses it, ‘The outward person of the messenger does not validate his message; rather, the nature of the message validates the messenger’”. 9 The false teachers in Galatia did believe in what some call the "core facts" of the gospel, that is, the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. They did not deny these facts. They simply wanted to combine certain elements of the Law of Moses with the gospel message, yet Paul condemns such a "gospel" (Galatians 1:6-9; 5:14). “Those who teach that we need to be united only in the gospel (meaning, the facts pertaining to the death, burial, resurrection and ascension of Christ and the one act of baptism) but can have diversity in the realm of doctrine (all other teachings in the Bible) find their doctrine answered here in the first few verses of Galatians. The apostasy which Paul was refuting was, by the modern terminology, a ‘doctrinal’ apostasy” (Willis pp. 14-15).  The true purpose for the Law of Moses: (3:10-24; 4:1-5; 2:16-21)  The source of Paul's Gospel: (Chapters 1 and 2)  Liberty does not mean freedom to sin: (5:6-26). Certain obligations come with freedom (6:1-10).  One can fall away: (1:6-9; 3:1-4; 4:11; 5:1-4; 6:1)  The church is the true Israel of God: (6:16; 3:25-29; 4:1-6; 21-31)  Justification by an obedient faith: (2:16-21; 3:14, 26-27; 5:6-7) Modern Applications  Mormonism, which claims to be a gospel delivered by an angel (1:6-9).  The religion of one's parents can be wrong (1:14).

9 The Bible Speaks Today. 'The Message of Galatians', John R.W. Stott, pp. 26-28.

8

 The gospel is not a product of the "church" (1:11-12,16).  No toleration or compromise is to be given to false teachers (2:5).  Anyone can be wrong, regardless of position and no one is above rebuke (2:11).  The gospel is meant to be lived (2:14).  Trying to keep any part of the Law of Moses (Sabbath Day, tithing, the priesthood, instrumental music in worship, food laws, or religious circumcision), places one under a curse (3:10), and obligates one to keep every aspect of the Law of Moses. Erdman says, “No one today would dream that a Christian should be compelled to observe Jewish rites in order to attain the highest spiritual privileges and experiences” (p. 11). Of course, such a statement is false. Besides the obvious “Law of Moses” keepers, the Seventh Day Adventists, virtually every modern denomination has taken at least one Old Testament religious practice and incorporated it into their worship.

Tithing and instrumental Music are the most common. Galatians 5:3-4 is very clear. The religious observance of simply one Old Testament practice cuts one off from grace.  The Bible is inspired right down to the single words used and whether they were plural or singular (3:16).  We are no longer under the Law of Moses (3:24-25).  Faith and baptism results in being a child of God (3:26-27).  Christians are the true children of Abraham (3:28).  Not every truth sounds good at first (4:16).  The faith that justifies must "work" (5:6), and one needs to obey the truth to be effective (5:7).  Christian liberty means serving others (5:13).  Selfish division in a congregation will spiritually destroy individual Christians (5:15).  Sinful behavior is often obvious (5:19).  Regardless of what people call it, if it fits into a "sin category", it is wrong (5:21).  I am my brothers keeper (6:1).  Counseling and assistance never relieves the personal responsibility and accountability of the person with the problem (6:1, 5).  God always gets the last word (6:7).  Everyone is given opportunities to do good (6:10).

9

Outline: I.

The Argument from History (1:1-2:21).

A. B. C.

D. E. F. II.

Greeting: 1:1-5 The letter's subject introduced: 1:6-9 Paul's conversion: 1:10-24 1.

Paul's protest: 1:10-24 2.

Paul's life before his conversion: 1:13-14 3.

Paul's conversion and subsequent events: 1:15-24 Later relations with Jerusalem church leaders: 2:1-10 The clash with Peter: 2:11-16 Death and the new life: 2:17-21

The Argument from Old Testament Scripture: 3:1-5:1 A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H.

Introduction: 3:1-6 Abraham's faith: 3:7-9 Who is under the curse? 3:10-14 Does Law annul Promise? 3:15-18 What is the purpose of the Law? 3:19-29 The difference between son and infant: 4:1-11 A personal appeal for better relations: 4:12-20 An argument from the O.T.: 4:21-5:1

III.

The Moral Argument: 5:2-6:18

A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H.

The goal of the gospel: 5:2-6 A personal aside: 5:7-12 The true use of freedom: 5:13-18 The natural results of natural man: 5:19-21 The harvest of the Spirit: 5:22-26 How to deal with the offender: 6:1-6 Sowing and Reaping: 6:7-10 The autographed conclusion: 6:11-18 10

10

From Cole. p. 27 10