Epistle To The Galatians

Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible

Galatians, Epistle To The

1. Occasion of the Epistle . From internal evidence we gather that St. Paul had, when he wrote, paid two visits to the Galatians. On the first visit, which was due to an illness (  Galatians 4:13 ), he was welcomed in the most friendly way; on the second he warned them against Judaizers (  Galatians 1:9 ,   Galatians 5:3 ‘again,’ cf.   Galatians 4:13 ‘the former time,’ though this may be translated ‘formerly’). After the second visit Judaizers came among the Galatians, and, under the influence of a single individual (the ‘who’ of   Galatians 3:1 ,   Galatians 5:7 is singular, cf.   Galatians 5:10 ) persuaded them that they must be circumcised, that St. Paul had changed his mind and was inconsistent, that he had refrained from preaching circumcision to them only from a desire to be ‘all things to all men,’ but that he had preached it (at any rate as the better way) to others. It is doubtful if the Judaizers upheld circumcision as necessary to salvation, or only as necessary to a complete Christianity. It depends on whether we fix the date before or after the Council of   Acts 15:1-41 , which of these views we adopt (see § 4 ). Further, the Judaizers disparaged St. Paul’s authority as compared with that of the Twelve. On hearing this the Apostle hastily wrote the Epistle to check the evil, and (probably) soon followed up the Epistle with a personal visit.

2. To whom written. The North Galatian and South Galatian theories . It is disputed whether the inhabitants of N. Galatia are addressed (Lightfoot, Salmon, the older commentators, Schmiedel in Encyc. Bibl. ), or the inhabitants of Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe, which lay in the S. part of the Roman province Galatia (Ramsay, Sanday, Zahn, Renan, Pfleiderer, etc.). Those who hold the N. Galatian theory take   Acts 16:6;   Acts 18:23 as indicating that St. Paul visited Galatia proper, making a long detour. They press the argument that he would not have called men of the four cities by the name ‘Galatians,’ as these lay outside Galatia proper, and that ‘Galatians’ must mean men who are Gauls by blood and descent; also that ‘by writers speaking familiarly of the scenes in which they had themselves taken part’ popular usage rather than official is probable, and therefore to call the Christian communities in the four cities ‘the churches of Galatia’ would be as unnatural as to speak of Pesth or (before the Italo-Austrian war) Venice as ‘the Austrian cities’ (Lightfoot, Gal. p. 19). Pesth is not a case in point, for no educated person would call it ‘Austrian’; but the Venice illustration is apt. These are the only weighty arguments. On the other hand, the N. Galatian theory creates Churches unheard of elsewhere in 1st cent. records; it is difficult on this hypothesis to understand the silence of Acts, which narrates all the critical points of St. Paul’s work. But Acts does tell us very fully of the foundation of the Church in S. Galatia. Then, again, on the N. Galatian theory, St. Paul nowhere in his Epistles mentions the four cities where such eventful things happened, except once for blame in   2 Timothy 3:11 a silence made more remarkable by the fact that in the collection of the alms he does mention ‘the churches of Galatia’ (  1 Corinthians 16:1 ). If the four cities are not here referred to, why were they omitted? The main argument of the N. Galatian theory, given above, is sufficiently answered by taking into account St. Paul’s relation to the Roman Empire (see art. Acts of the Apostles, § 7 .)

With regard to the nomenclature, we notice that St. Luke sometimes uses popular non-political names like ‘Phrygia’ or ‘Mysia’ ( Acts 2:10;   Acts 16:3 ); but St. Paul, as a Roman citizen, uses place-names in their Roman sense throughout, e.g. ‘Achaia’ (which in Greek popular usage had a much narrower meaning than the Roman province, and did not include Athens, while St. Paul contrasts it with Macedonia, the only other Roman province in Greece, and therefore clearly uses it in its Roman sense,   Romans 15:25 ,   2 Corinthians 9:2; 2Co 11:10 ,   1 Thessalonians 1:7 f.; cf.   1 Corinthians 16:5 ), ‘Macedonia,’ ‘Illyricum’ (  Romans 15:19 only; the Greeks did not use this name popularly as a substantive, and none but a Roman could so denote the province; in   2 Timothy 4:10 St. Paul himself calls it ‘Dalmatia,’ as the name-usage was changing from the one to the other),‘Syria and Cilicia’ (one Roman province), and ‘Asia’ (the Roman province of that name, the W. part of Asia Minor, including Mysia). We may compare St. Peter’s nomenclature in   1 Peter 1:1 , where he is so much influenced by Pauline ideas as to designate all Asia Minor north of the Taurus by enumerating the Roman provinces. St. Paul, then, calls all citizens of the province of Galatia by the honourable name ‘Galatians.’ To call the inhabitants of the four cities ‘Phrygians’ or ‘Lycaonians’ would be as discourteous as to call them ‘slaves’ or ‘barbarians.’ The Roman colonies like Pisidian Antioch were most jealous of their Roman connexion.

The South Galatian theory reconciles the Epistle and Acts without the somewhat violent hypotheses of the rival theory. The crucial passages are  Acts 16:6;   Acts 18:23 , which are appealed to on both sides. In   Acts 16:6 St. Paul comes from Syro-Cilicia to Derbe and Lystra, no doubt by land, through the Cilician Gates [Derbe being mentioned first as being reached first, while in   Acts 14:6 Lystra was reached first and mentioned first], and then ‘they went through ( v.l. going through) the region of Phrygia and Galatia,’ lit. ‘the Phrygian and Galatic region’ [so all the best MSS read these last words]. This ‘region,’ then (probably a technical term for the subdivision of a province), was a single district to which the epithets ‘Phrygian’ and ‘Galatic’ could both be applied; that is, it was that district which was part of the old country of Phrygia, and also part of the Roman province of Galatia. But no part of the old Galatia overlapped Phrygia, and the only district satisfying the requirements is the region around Pisidian Antioch and Iconium; therefore in   Acts 16:6 a detour to N. Galatia is excluded. Moreover, no route from N. Galatia to Bithynia could bring the travellers ‘over against Mysia’ (  Acts 16:7 ). They would have had to return almost to the spot from which they started on their hypothetic journey to N. Galatia. Attempts to translate this passage, even as read by the best MSS, as if it were ‘Phrygia and the Galatic region,’ as the AV [Note: Authorized Version.] text (following inferior MSS) has it, have been made by a citation of   Luke 3:1 , but this appears to be a mistake; the word translated there ‘Ituræa’ is really an adjective ‘Ituræan,’ and the meaning probably is ‘the Ituræan region which is also called Trachonitis.’

In the other passage,  Acts 18:23 , the grammar and therefore the meaning are different. St. Paul comes, probably, by the same land route as before, and to the same district; yet now Derbe and Lystra are not mentioned by name. St. Paul went in succession through ‘the Galatic region’ and through ‘Phrygia’ (or ‘[the] Phrygian [region]’). The grammar requires two different districts here. The first is the’ Galatic region’ [of Lycaonia] that part of old Lycaonia which was in the province Galatia, i.e. the region round Derbe and Lystra. The second is the ‘Phrygian region’ [of Galatia], i.e. what was in   Acts 16:6 called the Phrygo-Galatic region, that around Antioch and Iconium. In using a different phrase St. Luke considers the travellers’ point of view; for in the latter case they leave Syrian Antioch, and enter, by way of non-Roman Lycaonia, into Galatic Lycaonia (‘the Galatic region’), while in the former case they start from Lystra and enter the Phrygo-Galatic region near Iconium.

All this is clear on the S. Galatian theory. But on the other theory it is very hard to reconcile the Epistle with Acts. The S. Galatian theory also fits in very well with incidental notices in the Epistle, such as the fact that the Galatians evidently knew Barnabas well, and were aware that he was the champion of the Gentiles ( Galatians 2:13 ‘ even Barnabas’); but Barnabas did not accompany Paul on the Second Missionary Journey, when, on the N. Galatian theory, the Galatians were first evangelized. Again,   Galatians 4:13 fits in very well with   Acts 13:14 on the S. Galatian theory; for the very thing that one attacked with an illness in the low-lying lands of Pamphylia would do would be to go to the high uplands of Pisidian Antioch. This seems to have been an unexpected change of plan (one which perhaps caused Mark’s defection). On the other hand, if a visit to Galatia proper were part of the plan in   Acts 16:1-40 to visit Bithynia,   Galatians 4:13 is unintelligible.

3. St. Paul’s autobiography . In chs. 1, 2 the Apostle vindicates his authority by saying that he received it direct from God, and not through the older Apostles, with whom the Judaizers compared him unfavourably. For this purpose he tells of his conversion, of his relations with the Twelve, and of his visits to Jerusalem; and shows that he did not receive his commission from men. Prof. Ramsay urges with much force that it was essential to Paul’s argument that he should mention all visits paid by him to Jerusalem between his conversion and the time of his evangelizing the Galatians. In the Epistle we read of two visits (  Galatians 1:18 ,   Galatians 2:1 ), the former 3 years after his conversion (or after his return to Damascus), to visit Cephas, when of the Apostles he saw only James the Lord’s brother besides, and the latter 14 years after his conversion (or after his first visit), when he went ‘by revelation’ with Barnabas and Titus and privately laid before the Twelve (this probably is the meaning of ‘them’ in   Galatians 2:2 : James, Cephas, and John are mentioned) the gospel which he preached among the Gentiles. We have, then, to ask, To which, if any, of the visits recorded in Acts do these correspond? Most scholars agree that   Galatians 1:18 =   Acts 9:26 ff., and that the word ‘Apostles’ In the latter place means Peter and James only. But there is much diversity of opinion concerning   Acts 2:1 . Lightfoot and Sanday identify this visit with that of   Acts 15:2 (the Jerusalem Council), saying that at the intermediate visit of   Acts 11:30 there were no Apostles in Jerusalem, the storm of persecution having broken over the Church (only the ‘elders’ are mentioned), and the Apostles having retired; as, therefore, St. Paul’s object was to give his relation to the Twelve, he does not mention this visit, during which he did not see them. Ramsay identifies the visit with that of   Acts 11:30 , since otherwise St. Paul would be suppressing a point which would tell in favour of his opponents, it being essential to his argument to mention all his visits (see above); moreover, the hypothesis of the flight of the Apostles and of ‘every Christian of rank’ is scarcely creditable to them. They would hardly have left the Church to take care of itself, or have allowed the elders to bear the brunt of the storm; while the mention of elders only in   Acts 11:30 would be due to the fact that they, not the Apostles, would administer the aims (cf.   Acts 6:2 ).

Other arguments on either side may perhaps balance each other, and are not crucial. Thus Prof. Ramsay adduces the discrepancies between  Galatians 2:2 and   Acts 15:2; in the former case the visit was ‘by revelation,’ in the latter by appointment of the brethren (these are not altogether incompatible facts); in the former case the discussion was private, in the latter public (this is accounted for by the supposition of a preliminary private conference, but that greatly damages St. Paul’s argument). On the other band, Dr. Sanday thinks that the stage of controversy in   Galatians 2:1-21 suits   Acts 15:1-41 rather than   Acts 11:1-30 . This argument does not appear to the present writer to be of much value, for the question of the Gentiles and the Mosaic Law had really arisen with the case of Cornelius (  Acts 11:2 ff.), and from the nature of things must have been present whenever a Gentile became a Christian. The Council in   Acts 15:1-41 represents the climax when the matter came to public discussion and formal decision; we cannot suppose that the controversy sprang up suddenly with a mushroom growth. On the whole, in spite of the great weight of the names of Bp. Lightfoot and Dr. Sanday, the balance of the argument appears to lie on the side of Prof. Ramsay.

St. Peter at Antioch . This incident in the autobiography (  Galatians 2:11 ff.) is placed by Lightfoot immediately after   Acts 15:36 . Ramsay thinks that it was not necessarily later in time than that which precedes, though on his view of the second visit it is in its proper chronological order. He puts it about the time of   Acts 15:1 . The situation would then be as follows. At first many Jewish Christians began to associate with Gentile Christians. But when the logical position was put to them that God had opened another door to salvation outside the Law of Moses, and so had practically annulled the Law, they shrank from the consequences, Peter began to draw back (this is the force of the tenses in   Galatians 2:12 ), and even Barnabas was somewhat carried away. But Paul’s arguments were convincing, and both Peter and Barnabas became champions of the Gentiles at the Council. It is difficult to understand Peter’s action if it happened after the Council.

4. Date and place of writing . Upholders of the N. Galatian theory, understanding   Acts 16:6;   Acts 18:23 to represent the two visits to the Galatians implied in   Galatians 4:13 , usually fix on Ephesus as the place of writing, and suppose that the Epistle dates from the long stay there recorded in   Acts 19:8 ff., probably early in the stay (cf.   Galatians 1:6 ‘ye are so quickly removing’); but Lightfoot postpones the date for some two years, and thinks that the Epistle was written from Macedonia (  Acts 20:1 ), rather earlier than Romans and after 2 Corinthians. He gives a comparison of these Epistles, showing the very close connexion between Romans and Galatians: the same use of OT, the same ideas and same arguments, founded on the same texts; in the doctrinal part of Galatians we can find a parallel for almost every thought and argument in Romans. It is generally agreed that the latter, a systematic treatise, is later than the former, a personal and fragmentary Epistle. The likeness is much less marked between Galatians and I and 2 Corinthians; but in 2 Corinthians the Apostle vindicates his authority much as in Galatians. The opposition to him evidently died away with the controversy about circumcision. Thus it is clear that these four Epistles hang together and are to be separated chronologically from the rest.

On the S. Galatian theory, the Epistle was written from Antioch. Ramsay puts it at the end of the Second Missionary Journey ( Acts 18:22 ). Timothy, he thinks, had been sent to his home at Lystra from Corinth, and rejoined Paul at Syrian Antioch, bringing news of the Galatian defection. Paul wrote off hastily, despatched Timothy back with the letter, and as soon as possible followed himself (  Acts 18:23 ). On this supposition the two visits to the Galatians implied by the Epistle would be those of   Acts 13:1-52 f. and 16. The intended visit of Paul would be announced by Timothy, though it was not mentioned in the letter, which in any case was clearly written in great haste. It is certainly strange, on the Ephesus or Macedonia hypothesis, that Paul neither took any steps to visit the erring Galatians, nor, if he could not go to them, explained the reason of his inability. Ramsay’s view, however, has the disadvantage that it separates Galatians and Romans by some years. Yet if St. Paul kept a copy of his letters, he might well have elaborated his hastily sketched argument in Galatians into the treatise in Romans, at some little interval of time. Ramsay gives a.d. 53 for Galatians, the other three Epistles following in 56 and 57.

Another view is that of Weber, who also holds that Syrian Antioch was the place of writing, but dates the Epistle before the Council (see   Acts 14:28 ). He agrees with Ramsay as to the two visits to Jerusalem; but he thinks that the manner of the Judaizers’ attack points to a time before the Apostolic decreee.   Galatians 6:12 (‘compel’) suggests that they insisted on circumcision as necessary for salvation (§ 1 ). If so, their action could hardly have taken place after the Council. A strong argument on this side is that St. Paul makes no allusion to the decision of the Council. The chronological difficulty of the 14 years (  Galatians 2:1 ) is met by placing the conversion of St. Paul in a.d. 32. Weber thinks that   Galatians 5:2 could not have been written after the circumcision of Timothy; but this is doubtful. The two visits to the Galatians, on this view, would be those of   Acts 13:1-52 , on the outward and the homeward journey respectively. The strongest argument against Weber’s date is that it necessitates such a long interval between Galatians and Romans.

5. Abstract of the Epistle . Chs. 1, 2. Answer to the Judaizers’ disparagement of Paul’s office and message. Narrative of his life from his conversion onwards, showing that he did not receive his Apostleship and his gospel through the medium of other Apostles, but direct from God.

 Galatians 3:1 to   Galatians 5:12 . Doctrinal exposition of the freedom of the gospel, as against the legalism of the Judaizers. Abraham was justified by faith, not by the Law, and so are the children of Abraham. The Law was an inferior dispensation, though good for the time, and useful as educating the world for freedom; the Galatians were bent on returning to a state of tutelage, and their present attitude was retrogressive.

 Galatians 5:13 to   Galatians 6:10 . Hortatory . ‘Hold fast by freedom, but do not mistake it for licence. Be forbearing and liberal.’

 Galatians 6:11-18 . Conclusion . Summing up of the whole in Paul’s own hand, written in large characters (  Galatians 6:11 RV [Note: Revised Version.] ) to show the importance of the subject of the autograph.

6. Genuineness of the Epistle . Until lately Galatians,   Romans 1:1-32 and 2 Corinthians were universally acknowledged to be by St. Paul, and the Tübingen school made their genuineness the basis of their attack on the other Epistles. Lately Prof. van Manen ( Encyc. Bibl. s.v. ‘Paul’) and others have denied the genuineness of these four also, chiefly on the ground that they are said to quote late Jewish apocalypses, to assume the existence of written Gospels, and to quote Philo and Seneca, and because the external attestation is said to begin as late as a.d. 150. These arguments are very unconvincing, the facts being improbable. And why should there not have been written Gospels in St. Paul’s time? (cf.   Luke 1:1 ). As for the testimony, Clement of Rome explicitly mentions and quotes 1 Corinthians, and his date cannot be brought down later than a.d. 100. Our Epistle is probably alluded to or cited by Barnabas, Hermas, and Ignatius (5 times); certainly by Polycarp (4 times), the Epistle to Diognetus , Justin Martyr, Melito, Athenagoras, and the Acts of Paul and Thecla . It is found in the Old Latin and Syrian versions and in the Muratorian Fragment ( c [Note: circa, about.] . a.d. 180 200), used by 2nd cent. heretics, alluded to by adversaries like Celsus and the writer of the Clementine Homilies , and quoted by name and distinctly (as their fashion was) by Irenæus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian, at the end of the 2nd century. But, apart from this external testimony, the spontaneous nature of the Epistle is decisive in favour of its genuineness. There is no possible motive for forgery. An anti-Jewish Gnostic would not have used expressions of deference to the Apostles of the Circumcision; an Ebionite would not have used the arguments of the Epistle against the Mosaic Law (thus the Clementine Homilies , an Ebionite work, clearly hits at the Epistle in several passages); an orthodox forger would avoid all appearance of conflict between Peter and Paul. After a.d. 70 there never was the least danger of the Gentile Christians being made to submit to the Law. There is therefore no reason for surprise that the recent attack on the authenticity of the Epistle has been decisively rejected in this country by all the best critics.

A. J. Maclean.

Morrish Bible Dictionary

The date when this Epistle was written has been disputed more than that of any of the others, some placing it early, and others later. The events seem best to agree thus: on Paul's second missionary journey he went throughout Phrygia and the region of Galatia.  Acts 16:6 . We learn from  Galatians 4:13-15 that he had preached the gospel to them, and that they had received him as an angel and would have plucked out their eyes for him. This visit would have been about A.D. 51. Then about 54Paul again visited them; all we read as to this journey is that he went over all the country of Galatia, strengthening, or confirming, all the disciples.   Acts 18:23 . They may, alas, have as readily received the Judaising teachers, and when this came to the ears of Paul, he wrote this Epistle to them. He grieved that they were so soon diverted to another gospel which was not another. In  1 Corinthians 16:1 we read that Paul had instructed the churches in Galatia as to the collection for the poor. This was written to Corinth about A.D. 55. The collection is not mentioned in his Epistle to the Galatians, and as far as we know he did not visit them again. This has caused some to suppose that Paul wrote the Epistle to them after his first visit; and that he gave them the directions as to the collection on his second visit; but they may have been given by another letter or by a private messenger.

 Galatians 1 . After a brief opening, in which the intent of the Lord's giving Himself for our sins is set forth, namely, to deliver us from this present age according to the will of God, the apostle proceeds directly to the point and marvels at the rapid departure of the Galatian converts from the gospel. In the strongest terms he denounces the efforts made to pervert them from the grace of Christ to other ground. Paul would have them know that his apostleship was not by man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father; that the gospel he preached was by the revelation of Jesus Christ. The Jews' religion, by which they were so attracted, had led him to be a bitter persecutor, but it had pleased God to reveal His Son in him that he might preach Him among the Gentiles. His commission and authority had come direct from on high, and had no connection with Jerusalem as a source. The saints in Judaea did but glorify God in him.

 Galatians 2 . Fourteen Years after [his conversion] he went up to Jerusalem and communicated to those there the gospel he preached to the Gentiles. He utterly refused to submit to pressure from Judaising brethren in the case of the Gentile convert Titus, and in result received the full fellowship of the three pillars — James, Cephas, and John — in regard to his ministry among the heathen. Subsequently, at Antioch, Paul had actually withstood Peter to the face as to the truth of the gospel, which Peter was fatally compromising from fear of the Jews. Peter's conduct was wholly inconsistent. Peter and Paul had themselves left the law for justification, to find it alone on the principle of faith in Christ. Had Christ become the minister of sin in their doing this? If not, in going back to the law they built anew what they had destroyed, and were confessedly transgressors; for if right in leaving it for Christ, they were wrong in returning to it. For Paul, however, it was true that through law he had died to law, in order to live to God. With Christ he was crucified (was judicially dead); yet he lived, but no longer himself, for Christ lived in him, and his life as still in this world was by faith — the faith of the Son of God, a living object whose love filled his soul. Christ had died in vain if righteousness came by the law.

 Galatians 3 . The Galatians were as though bewitched. Had they received the Spirit on the principle of law or of faith? To this there could be but one answer. Having begun in the Spirit, were they now to be made perfect by the flesh ? Faith was the principle on which Abraham, the head of promise and blessing, was reckoned righteous, and on which the Gentiles would, with believing Abraham, receive blessing, according to God's promise to him. Those under law were under the curse; and on that ground none could be justified. Christ had borne the curse that Abraham's blessing might come on the Gentiles in Christ Jesus, and that through faith they might receive the promise of the Spirit. The law, given four hundred and thirty years after the promise, could not set the latter aside, which was made not only to Abraham, but to his Seed, even to Christ. The law came in by the way till the Seed should come: it proved transgressions; it had been useful as a guard: it had been for those under it a tutor up to Christ. Now faith had come, such were no longer under a tutor; the Gentile believers were now God's sons by faith in Christ Jesus. In Christ distinctions between Jew and Gentile disappeared: all were one, and the Gentile believers being of Christ were Abraham's seed and heirs according to promise.

 Galatians 4 . Though heirs, the Jews were, under law, in the condition of children under age, held in bondage under the elements of the world, with which indeed the law had to do. But now God had sent forth His Son, to redeem those under law, that believers might receive sonship. He had sent the Spirit of His Son into their hearts, giving the cry of relationship, 'Abba, Father.' They were therefore no longer bondmen, but sons; and if sons, then heirs through God. Were the Gentile believers (formerly in heathen darkness, but now knowing God) going to turn back to the principles of law, which the apostle does not hesitate to call weak and beggarly elements? They observed days, and months, and times, and years, as though Christianity were a system for man in the flesh. But he reminds them of their former affection for him, and how they had received him as an angel of God. Was he now their enemy because he told them the truth? These Judaising teachers had sown this discord in order that they might supplant the apostle in their affections. Spiritually he again travailed in birth with them till Christ should be formed in them. He knew not what to make of them. Let those who wanted to be under law listen to it. He then submits to them the allegory of Sarah and Hagar, in which the principles of law and faith in God's promise are seen in conflict. The promise is secured in Isaac, that is, in Christ. Believers, as Isaac was, are children of promise, they are not children of the maid-servant but of the free woman.

 Galatians 5 . He exhorts the Galatians to stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ made free. If circumcised they were debtors to do the whole law, and were deprived of all profit from the Christ. They had in such case fallen from grace. Christians awaited the hope of righteousness, by the Spirit, on the principle of faith. For those in Christ faith wrought through love. The Galatians had run well, but who had now hindered them? The guilt of this mischief should be borne by the troubler, whoever he was. The scandal of the cross was done away if circumcision was preached, for it was rehabilitating the flesh. But love was the fulfilment of the law. The flesh and Spirit were in fact utterly opposed, but if led by the Spirit they were not under law. The works of the flesh are set forth in contrast to the fruit of the Spirit. Those that were of Christ had crucified the flesh with its lusts, the Spirit being the only power for christian walk.

 Galatians 6 . Some closing exhortations follow. The spiritual were to restore those taken in a fault, remembering what they were in themselves. They were to care for one another — to think nothing of themselves — to care for those who ministered to them in the word. He warns them of the consequences of sowing to the flesh, but in sowing to the Spirit they should reap eternal life. Let them do good then to all, but especially to the household of faith. He tells them he had written this letter with his own hand as evidence of his deep concern as to them. He once again refers to the mischief-makers in scathing terms. But the cross of the Lord Jesus Christ was his only boast, through whom the world was crucified unto him, and he to it. In Christ Jesus nothing availed but a new creation; and upon those who walked according to this rule peace and mercy are invoked. This Epistle, in which the grief of the apostle is mingled with indignation, is concluded by an affecting allusion to the sufferings he had endured in the maintenance of the truth which they were so lightly turning from: he bore in his body the marks of the Lord Jesus. There are none of the customary salutations.

The epistle is an example of the energy and rapidity of the apostle's style, and ofthe spiritual power of his argument. We see him deeply moved by the baneful influence of the Judaisers in Galatia and at their success. Alas! it is what has extended everywhere throughout Christendom.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia

I. The Authorship

1. Position of the Dutch School

2. Early Testimony

II. The Matter of the Epistle

A) Summary of Contents

1. Outline

2. Personal History (Galatians 1:11 through 2:21 (4:12-20; 6:17))

Paul's Independent Apostleship

3. The Doctrinal Polemic (Galatians 3:1 through 5:12)

(1) Thesis

(2) Main Argument

(3) Appeal and Warning

4. The Ethical Application (Galatians 5:13 through 6:10)

Law of the Spirit of Life

5. The Epilogue (Galatians 6:11-18)

B) Salient Points

1. The Principles at Stake

2. Present Stage of the Controversy

3. Paul's Depreciation of the Law

4. The Personal Question

C) Characteristics

1. Idiosyncrasy of the Epistle

2. Jewish Coloring

III. Relations to Other Epistles

1. Galatians and Romans

2. Links with 1 and 2 Corinthians

3. With the Corinthians-Romans Group

4. With Other Groups of Epistles

5. General Comparison

IV. The Destination and Date

1. Place and Time Interdependent

2. Internal Evidence

3. External Data

(1) Galatia and the Galatians

(2) Prima facie Sense of Acts 16:6

(3) The Grammar of Acts 16:6

(4) Notes of Time in the Epistle

(5) Paul's Renewed Struggle with Legalism

(6) Ephesus or Corinth?

(7) Paul's First Coming to Galatia

(8) Barnabas and the Galatians

(9) The Two Antiochs

(10) Wider Bearings of the Problem

Literature

When and to whom, precisely, this letter was written, it is difficult to say; its authorship and purpose are unmistakable. One might conceive it addressed by the apostle Paul, in its main tenor, to almost any church of his Gentile mission attracted to Judaism, at any point within the years circa 45-60 ad. Some plausibly argue that it was the earliest, others place it among the later, of the Pauline Epistles. This consideration dictates the order of our inquiry, which proceeds from the plainer to the more involved and disputable parts of the subject.

I. The Authorship

1. Position of the Dutch School

The Tübingen criticism of the last century recognized the four major epistles of Paul as fully authentic, and made them the corner-stone of its construction of New Testament history. Only Bruno Bauer ( Kritik. d. paulin. Briefe , 1850-52) attacked them in this sense, while several other critics accused them of serious interpolations; but these attempts made little impression. Subsequently, a group of Dutch scholars, beginning with Loman in his Quaestiones Paulinae (1882) and represented by Van Manen in the Encyclopedia Biblica (art. "Paul"), have denied all the canonical epistles to the genuine Paul. They postulate a gradual development in New Testament ideas covering the first century and a half after Christ, and treat the existing letters as "catholic adaptations" of fragmentary pieces from the apostle's hand, produced by a school of "Paulinists" who carried their master's principles far beyond his own intentions. On this theory, Galatians, with its advanced polemic against the law, approaching the position of Marcion (140 ad), was work of the early 2nd century. Edwin Johnson in England ( Antiqua Mater , 1887), and Steck in Germany ( Galaterbrief , 1888), are the only considerable scholars outside of Holland who have adopted this hypothesis; it is rejected by critics so radical as Scholten and Schmiedel (see the article of the latter on "Galatians" in EB ). Knowling has searchingly examined the position of the Dutch school in his Witness of the Epistles (1892) - it is altogether too arbitrary and uncontrolled by historical fact to be entertained; see Jülicher's or Zahn's Introduction to New Testament (English translation), to the same effect. Attempts to dismember this writing, and to appropriate it for other hands and later times than those of the apostle Paul, are idle in view of its vital coherence and the passionate force with which the author's personality has stamped itself upon his work; the Paulinum pectus speaks in every line. The two contentions on which the letter turns - concerning Paul's apostleship, and the circumcision of Gentile Christians - belonged to the apostle's lifetime: in the fifth and sixth decades these were burning questions; by the 2nd century the church had left them far behind.

2. Early Testimony

Early Christianity gives clear and ample testimony to this document. Marcion placed it at the head of his Apostolikon (140 ad); Justin Martyr, Athenagoras, Melito, quoted it about the same time. It is echoed by Ignatius ( Philad ., i) and Polycarp ( Philip ., iii and v) a generation earlier, and seems to have been used by contemporary Gnostic teachers. It stands in line with the other epistles of Paul in the oldest Latin, Syriac and Egyptian translations, and in the Muratorian (Roman) Canon of the 2nd century. It comes full into view as an integral part of the new Scripture in Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian at the close of this period. No breath of suspicion as to the authorship, integrity or apostolic authority of the Ep. to the Gal has reached us from ancient times.

II. Matter of the Epistle

A) Summary of Contents

1. Outline

A double note of war sounds in the address and greeting ( Galatians 1:1 ,  Galatians 1:4 ). Astonishment replaces the customary thanksgiving ( Galatians 1:6-10 ): The Galatians are listening to preachers of "another gospel" ( Galatians 1:6 ,  Galatians 1:7 ) and traducers of the apostle ( Galatians 1:8 ,  Galatians 1:10 ), whom he declares "anathema." Paul has therefore two objects in writing - to vindicate himself , and to clear and reinforce his doctrine . The first he pursues from  Galatians 1:11 to   Galatians 2:21; the second from  Galatians 3:1 to   Galatians 5:12 . Appropriate: moral exhortations follow in 5:13 through 6:10. The closing paragraph ( Galatians 6:11-17 ) resumes incisively the purport of the letter. Personal, argumentative, and hortatory matter interchange with the freedom natural in a letter to old friends.

2. Personal History (Galatians 1:11 Through 2:21 ( Galatians 4:12-20;  Galatians 6:17 ))

Paul's Independent Apostleship

Paul asserts himself for his gospel's sake, by showing that his commission was God-given and complete ( Galatians 1:11 ,  Galatians 1:12 ). On four decisive moments in his course he dwells for this purpose - as regards the second manifestly ( Galatians 1:20 ), as to others probably, in correction of misstatements:

(1) A thorough-paced Judaist and persecutor ( Galatians 1:13 ,  Galatians 1:14 ), Paul was supernaturally converted to Christ ( Galatians 1:15 ), and received at conversion his charge for the Gentiles, about which he consulted no one ( Galatians 1:16 ,  Galatians 1:17 ).

(2) three years later he "made acquaintance with Cephas" in Jerusalem and saw James besides, but no "other of the apostles" ( Galatians 1:18 ,  Galatians 1:19 ). For long he was known only by report to "the churches of Judea" ( Galatians 1:21-24 ).

(3) At the end of "fourteen years" he "went up to Jerusalem," with Barnabas, to confer about the "liberty" of Gentile believers, which was endangered by "false brethren" ( Galatians 2:1-5 ). Instead of supporting the demand for the circumcision of the "Greek" Titus ( Galatians 2:3 ), the "pillars" there recognized the sufficiency and completeness of Paul's "gospel of the uncircumcision" and the validity of his apostleship ( Galatians 2:6-8 ). They gave "right hands of fellowship" to himself and Barnabas on this understanding ( Galatians 2:9 ,  Galatians 2:10 ). The freedom of Gentile Christianity was secured, and Paul had not "run in vain."

(4) At Antioch, however, Paul and Cephas differed ( Galatians 2:11 ). Cephas was induced to withdraw from the common church-table, and carried "the rest of the Jews," including Barnabas, with him ( Galatians 2:12 ,  Galatians 2:13 ). "The truth of the gospel," with Cephas' own sincerity, was compromised by this "separation," which in effect "compelled the Gentiles to Judaize" ( Galatians 2:13 ,  Galatians 2:14 ). Paul therefore reproved Cephas publicly in the speech reproduced by  Galatians 2:14-21 , the report of which clearly states the evangelical position and the ruinous consequences ( Galatians 2:18 ,  Galatians 2:21 ) of reestablishing "the law."

3. Doctrinal Polemic (Galatians 3:1 Through 5:12)

(1) Thesis

The doctrinal polemic was rehearsed in the autobiography ( Galatians 2:3-5 ,  Galatians 2:11-12 ). In  Galatians 2:16 is laid down thesis of the epistle: "A man is not justified by the works of law but through faith in Jesus Christ." This proposition is ( a ) demonstrated from experience and history in 3:1-4:7; then ( b ) enforced by 4:8-5:12.

(2) Main Argument

( a 1) From his own experience ( Galatians 2:19-21 ) Paul passes to that of the readers, who are "bewitched" to forget "Christ crucified" ( Galatians 3:1 )! Had their life in "the Spirit" come through "works of the law" or the "hearing of faith"? Will the flesh consummate what the Spirit began ( Galatians 3:2-5 )? ( a 2) Abraham, they are told, is the father of God's people; but 'the men of faith' are Abraham's true heirs ( Galatians 3:6-9 ). "The law" curses every transgressor; Scripture promised righteousness through faith for the very reason that justification by legal "doing" is impossible ( Galatians 3:10-12 ). "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law" in dying the death it declared "accursed" ( Galatians 3:13 ). Thus He conveyed to the nations "the promise of the Spirit," pledged to them through believing Abraham ( Galatians 3:7 ,  Galatians 3:14 ). ( a 3) The "testament" God gave to "Abraham and his seed" (a single "seed," observe) is unalterable. The Mosaic law, enacted 430 years later, could not nullify this instrument ( Galatians 3:15-17 the King James Version). Nullified it wound have been, had its fulfillment turned on legal performance instead of Divine "grace" (  Galatians 3:18 ). ( a 4) "Why then the law?" Sin required it, pending the accomplishment of "the promise." Its promulgation through intermediaries marks its inferiority ( Galatians 3:19 ,  Galatians 3:20 ). With no power 'to give life,' it served the part of a jailer guarding us till "faith came," of "the paedagogus " training us 'for Christ' ( Galatians 3:21-25 ). ( a 5) But now "in Christ," Jew and Greek alike, "ye are all sons of God through faith"; being such, "you are Abraham's seed" and 'heirs in terms of the promise' ( Galatians 3:26-29 ). The 'infant' heirs, in tutelage, were 'subject to the elements of the world,' until "God sent forth his Son," placed in the like condition, to "redeem" them ( Galatians 4:1-5 ). Today the "cry" of "the Spirit of his Son" in your "hearts" proves this redemption accomplished ( Galatians 4:6 ,  Galatians 4:7 ).

The demonstration is complete; Gal 3:1-4:7 forms the core of the epistle. The growth of the Christian consciousness has been traced from its germ in Abraham to its flower in the church of all nations. The Mosaic law formed a disciplinary interlude in the process, which has been all along a life of faith. Paul concludes where he began ( Galatians 3:2 ), by claiming the Spirit as witness to the full salvation of the Gentiles; compare Rom 8:1-27;  2 Corinthians 3:4-18;  Ephesians 1:13 ,  Ephesians 1:14 . From  Galatians 4:8 onward to   Galatians 5:12 , the argument is pressed home by appeal, illustration and warning.

(3) Appeal and Warning

( b 1) After "knowing God," would the Galatians return to the bondage in which ignorantly they served as gods "the elements" of Nature? ( Galatians 4:8 ,  Galatians 4:9 ). Their adoption of Jewish "seasons" points to this backsliding ( Galatians 4:10 ,  Galatians 4:11 ). ( b 2) Paul's anxiety prompts the entreaty of  Galatians 4:12-20 , in which he recalls his fervent reception by his readers, deplores their present alienation, and confesses his perplexity. ( b 3) Observe that Abraham had two sons - "after the flesh" and "through promise" (  Galatians 4:21-23 ); those who want to be under law are choosing the part of Ishmael: "Hagar" stands for 'the present Jerusalem' in her bondage; 'the Jerusalem above is free - she is our mother!' ( Galatians 4:24-28 ,  Galatians 4:31 ). The fate of Hagar and Ishmael pictures the issue of legal subjection ( Galatians 4:29 ,  Galatians 4:30 ): "Stand fast therefore" ( Galatians 5:1 ). ( b 4) The crucial moment comes at  Galatians 5:2 : the Galatians are half-persuaded (  Galatians 5:7 ,  Galatians 5:8 ); they will fatally commit themselves, if they consent to 'be circumcised.' This will sever them from Christ, and bind them to complete observance of Moses' law: law or grace - by one or the other they must stand (  Galatians 5:3-5 ). "Circumcision, uncircumcision" - these "count for nothing in Christ Jesus" ( Galatians 5:6 ). Paul will not believe in the defection of those who 'ran' so "well"; "judgment" will fall on their 'disturber' ( Galatians 5:7-10 ,  Galatians 5:12 ). Persecution marks himself as no circumcisionist ( Galatians 5:11 )!

4. The Ethical Application (Galatians 5:13-6:10)

Law of the Spirit of Life

The ethical application is contained in the phrase of  Romans 8:2 , "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus." (1) Love guards Christian liberty from license; it 'fulfills the whole law in a single word' ( Galatians 5:13-15 ). (2) The Spirit, who imparts freedom, guides the free man's "walk." Flesh and spirit are, opposing principles: deliverance from "the flesh" and its "works" is found in possession by "the Spirit," who bears in those He rules His proper "fruit." 'Crucified with Christ' and 'living in the Spirit,' the Christian man keeps God's law without bondage under it ( Galatians 5:16-26 ). (3) In cases of unwary fall, 'men of the Spirit' will know how to "restore" the lapsed, 'fulfilling Christ's law' and mindful of their own weakness ( Galatians 6:1-5 ). (4) Teachers have a peculiar claim on the taught; to ignore this is to 'mock God.' Men will "reap corruption" or "eternal life," as in such matters they 'sow to the flesh' or 'to the Spirit.' Be patient till the harvest! ( Galatians 6:6-10 ).

5. The Epilogue ( Galatians 6:11-18 )

The autograph conclusion ( Galatians 6:11 ) exposes the sinister motive of the circumcisionists, who are ashamed of the cross, the Christian's only boast ( Galatians 6:12-15 ). Such men are none of "the Israel of God!" ( Galatians 6:16 ). "The brand of Jesus" is now on Paul's body; at their peril "henceforth" will men trouble him! ( Galatians 6:17 ). The benediction follows ( Galatians 6:18 ).

B) Salient Points

1. The Principles at Stake

The postscript reveals the inwardness of the legalists' agitation. They advocated circumcision from policy more than from conviction, hoping to conciliate Judaism and atone for accepting the Nazarene - to hide the shame of the cross - by capturing for the Law the Gentile churches. They attack Paul because he stands in the way of this attempt. Their policy is treason; it surrenders to the world that cross of Christ, to which the world for its salvation must unconditionally submit. The grace of God the one source of salvation Gal ( Romans 1:3;  Romans 2:21;  Romans 5:4 ), the cross of Christ its sole ground ( Romans 1:4;  Romans 2:19-21;  Romans 3:13;  Romans 6:14 ), faith in the Good News its all-sufficient means ( Romans 2:16 ,  Romans 2:20;  Romans 3:2 ,  Romans 3:5-9 ,  Romans 3:23-26;  Romans 5:5 ), the Spirit its effectuating power ( Romans 3:2-5;  Romans 4:6 ,  Romans 4:7;  Romans 5:5 ,  Romans 5:16 -25;   Romans 6:8 ) - hence, emancipation from the Jewish law, and the full status of sons of God open to the Gentiles ( Romans 2:4 ,  Romans 2:5 ,  Romans 2:15-19;  Romans 3:10-14; 3:28-4:9, 26-31;  Romans 5:18;  Romans 6:15 ): these connected principles are at stake in the contention; they make up the doctrine of the epistle.

2. Present Stage of the Controversy

Circumcision is now proposed by the Judaists as a supplement to faith in Christ , as the qualification for sonship to Abraham and communion with the apostolic church ( Galatians 3:7 ,  Galatians 3:29 ). After the Council at Jerusalem, they no longer say outright, "Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved" ( Acts 15:1 ). Paul's Galatian converts, they admit, "have begun in the Spirit"; they bid them "be perfected" and attain the full Christian status by conforming to Moses - "Christ will profit" them much more, if they add to their faith circumcision ( Galatians 3:3;  Galatians 5:2; compare  Romans 3:1 ). This insidious proposal might seem to be in keeping with the findings of the Council; Peter's action at Antioch lent color to it. Such a grading of the Circumcision and Uncircumcision within the church offered a tempting solution of the legalist controversy; for it appeared to reconcile the universal destination of the gospel with the inalienable prerogatives of the sons of Abraham. Paul's reply is, that believing Gentiles are already Abraham's "seed" - nay, sons and heirs of God; instead of adding anything, circumcision would rob them of everything they have won in Christ; instead of going on to perfection by its aid, they would draw back unto perdition.

3. Paul's Depreciation of the Law

Paul carries the war into the enemies' camp, when he argues, ( a ) that the law of Moses brought condemnation, not blessing, on its subjects ( Galatians 3:10-24 ); and ( b ) that instead of completing the work of faith, its part in the Divine economy was subordinate ( Galatians 3:19-25 ). It was a temporary provision, due to man's sinful unripeness for the original covenant ( Galatians 3:19 ,  Galatians 3:24;  Galatians 4:4 ). The Spirit of sonship, now manifested in the Gentiles, is the infallible sign that the promise made to mankind in Abraham has been fulfilled. The whole position of the legalists is undermined by the use the apostle makes of the Abrahamic covenant.

4. The Personal Question

The religious and the personal questions of the epistle are bound up together; this  Galatians 5:2 clearly indicates. The latter naturally emerges first (  Galatians 1:1 ,  Galatians 1:11 ). Paul's authority must be overthrown, if his disciples are to be Judaized. Hence, the campaign of detraction against him (compare 2 Cor 10 through 12). The line of defense indicates the nature of the attack. Paul was said to be a second-hand, second-rate apostle, whose knowledge of Christ and title to preach Him came from Cephas and the mother church. In proof of this, an account was given of his career, which he corrects in Gal 1:13 through 2:21. "Cephas" was held up (compare  1 Corinthians 1:12 ) as the chief of the apostles, whose primacy Paul had repeatedly acknowledged; and "the pillars" at Jerusalem were quoted as maintainers of Mosaic rule and authorities for the additions to be made to Paul's imperfect gospel. Paul himself, it was insinuated, "preaches circumcision" where it suits him; he is a plausible time-server ( Galatians 1:10;  Galatians 5:11; compare  Acts 16:3;  1 Corinthians 9:19-21 ). The apostle's object in his self-defense is not to sketch his own life, nor in particular to recount his visits to Jerusalem, but to prove his independent apostleship and his consistent maintenance of Gentile rights. He states, therefore, what really happened on the critical occasions of his contact with Peter and the Jerusalem church. To begin with, he received his gospel and apostolic office from Jesus Christ directly, and apart from Peter ( Galatians 1:13-20 ); he was subsequently recognized by "the pillars" as apostle, on equality with Peter ( Galatians 2:6-9 ); he had finally vindicated his doctrine when it was assailed, in spite of Peter ( Galatians 2:11-12 ). The adjustment of Paul's recollections with Luke's narrative is a matter of dispute, in regard both to the conference of  Galatians 2:1-10 and the encounter of   Galatians 2:11-21; to these points we shall return, iv.3 (4), (5).

C) Characteristics

1. Idiosyncrasy of the Epistle

This is a letter of expostulation. Passion and argument are blended in it. Hot indignation and righteous scorn ( Galatians 1:7-9;  Galatians 4:17;  Galatians 5:10 ,  Galatians 5:12;  Galatians 6:12 ,  Galatians 6:13 ), tender, wounded affection ( Galatians 4:11-20 ), deep sincerity and manly integrity united with the loftiest consciousness of spiritual authority ( Galatians 1:10-12 ,  Galatians 1:20;  Galatians 2:4-6 ,  Galatians 2:14;  Galatians 5:2;  Galatians 6:17 ), above all a consuming devotion to the person and cross of the Redeemer, fill these few pages with an incomparable wealth and glow of Christian emotion. The power of mind the epistle exhibits matches its largeness of heart. Roman indeed carries out the argument with greater breadth and theoretic completeness; but Gal excels in pungency, incisiveness, and debating force. The style is that of Paul at the summit of his powers. Its spiritual elevation, its vigor and resource, its subtlety and irony, poignancy and pathos, the vis vivida that animates the whole, have made this letter a classic of religious controversy. The blemishes of Paul's composition, which contribute to his mastery of effect, are conspicuous here - his abrupt turns and apostrophes, and sometimes difficult ellipses (  Galatians 2:4-10 ,  Galatians 2:20;  Galatians 4:16-20;  Galatians 5:13 ), awkward parentheses and entangled periods ( Galatians 2:1-10 ,  Galatians 2:18;  Galatians 3:16 ,  Galatians 3:20;  Galatians 4:25 ), and outburst of excessive vehemence ( Galatians 1:8 ,  Galatians 1:9;  Galatians 5:12 ).

2. Jewish Coloring

The anti-legalist polemic gives a special Old Testament coloring to the epistle; the apostle meets his adversaries on their own ground. In  Galatians 3:16 ,  Galatians 3:19-20;  Galatians 4:21-31 , we have examples of the rabbinical exegesis Paul had learned from his Jewish masters. These texts should be read in part as argumenta ad hominem  ; however peculiar in form such Pauline passages may be, they always contain sound reasoning.

III. Relations to Other Epistles

(1) The connection of Galatians with Romans is patent; it is not sufficiently understood how pervasive that connection is and into what manifold detail it extends. The similarity of doctrine and doctrinal vocabulary manifest in Gal 2:13-6:16 and Rom 1:16-8:39 is accounted for by the Judaistic controversy on which Paul was engaged for so long, and by the fact that this discussion touched the heart of his gospel and raised questions in regard to which his mind was made up from the beginning ( Romans 1:15 ,  Romans 1:16 ), on which he would therefore always express himself in much the same way. Broadly speaking, the difference is that Romans is didactic and abstract, where Galatians is personal and polemical; that the former presents, a measured and rounded development of conceptions projected rapidly in the latter under the stress of controversy. The emphasis lies in Romans on justification by faith; in Galatians on the freedom of the Christian man. The contrast of tone is symptomatic of a calmer mood in the writer - the lull which follows the storm; it suits the different address of the two epistles.

1. Galatians and Romans

Besides the correspondence of purport, there is a verbal resemblance to Romans pervading the tissue of Galatians, and traceable in its mannerisms and incidental expressions. Outside of the identical quotations, we find more than 40 Greek locutions, some of them rare in the language, common to these two and occurring in these only of Paul's epistles - including the words rendered "bear" ( Romans 11:18 and   Galatians 5:10 , etc.); "blessing" or "gratulation" ( makarismós ), "divisions" ( Romans 16:17;  Galatians 5:20 ); "fail" or "fall from" ( ekpı́ptō ); "labor on" or "upon" (of persons), "passions" ( pathḗmata , in this sense); "set free" or "deliver" ( eleutheróō ); "shut up" or "conclude," and "shut out" or "exclude"; "travail (together)," and such phrases as "die to" (with dative), "hearing of faith," "if possible," "put on (the Lord Jesus) Christ," "those who do such things," "what saith the Scripture?" "where then?" (rhetorical), "why any longer?" The list would be greatly extended by adding expressions distinctive of this pair of letters that occur sporadically elsewhere in Paul. The kinship of Galatians-Romans in vocabulary and vein of expression resembles that existing between Colossians-Ephesians or 1 and 2 Thessalonians; it is twice as strong proportionately as that of 1 and 2 Corinthians. Not only the same current of thought, but with it, much the same stream of language was running through Paul's mind in writing these two epistles.

The association of Galatians with the two Corinthian letters, though less intimate than that of Galatians-Romans, is unmistakable.

2. Links with 1 and 2 Corinthians

We count 23 distinct locations shared by 2 Corinthians alone (in its 13 chapters) with Galatians, and 20 such shared with 1 Corinthians (16 chapters) - a larger proportion for the former. Among the Galatians-1 Corinthians peculiarities are the sayings, "A little leaven," etc., "circumcision is nothing," etc., and the phrases, "be not deceived," "it is manifest" ( dḗlon as predicate to a sentence), "known by God," "profit nothing" and "to be something," "scandal of the cross," "the spiritual" (of persons), "they that are Christ's (of Christ Jesus)." Peculiar to Gal through 2 Cor are "another gospel" and "false brethren," "brings into bondage," "devour" and "zealously seek" or "am jealous over" (of persons); "a new creation," "confirm" or "ratify" ( kuróō ); "I am perplexed," the antithesis of "sowing" and "reaping" (figuratively ); the phrase "on the contrary" or "contrariwise" ( t'ounantı́on ), etc. The conception of the "two covenants" (or "testaments") is conspicuous in both epistles ( Galatians 3:17-21;  Galatians 4:21-31;  2 Corinthians 3:8-18 ), and does not recur in Paul; in each case the ideas of "law" (or "letter"), "bondage," "death," are associated with the one, diathḗkē , of "spirit," "freedom," "life," with the other.  Galatians 3:13 ("Christ ... made a curse for us") is matched by   2 Corinthians 5:21 ("made sin for us"); in   Galatians 2:19 and   Galatians 6:14 we find Paul "crucified to the world" in the cross of his Master and "Christ" alone "living in" him; in   2 Corinthians 5:14 ,  2 Corinthians 5:15 this experience becomes a universal law for Christians; and where in   Galatians 6:17 the apostle appears as 'from hence-forth ... bearing in' his 'body the brand of Jesus,' in   2 Corinthians 4:10 he is "always bearing about in" his "body the dying of Jesus."

These identical or closely congruous trains of thought and turns of phrase, varied and dominant as they are, speak for some near connection between the two writings. By its list of vices in  Galatians 5:19 ,  Galatians 5:20 Galatians curiously, and somewhat intricately, links itself at once with 2 Corinthians and Roman (see   2 Corinthians 12:20;  Romans 13:13;  Romans 16:17 ). Galatians is allied by argument and doctrine with Romans, and by temper and sentiment with 2 Corinthians. The storm of feeling agitating our epistle blows from the same quarter, reaches the same height, and engages the same emotions with those which animate 2 Corinthians 10 through 13.

3. With the Corinthians-Romans Group

If we add to the 43 locutions confined in the Pauline Epistles to Galatians-Romans the 23 such of Galatians-2 Corinthians, the 20 of Galatians-1 Corinthians, the 14 that range over Galatians-Romans-2 Corinthians, the 15 of Galatians-Romans-1 Corinthians, the 7 of Galatians-1-2 Corinthians, and the 11 running through all four, we get a total of 133 words or phrases (apart from Old Testament quotations) specific to Galatians in common with one or more of the Corinthians-Romans group - an average, that is, of close upon 3 for each chapter of those other epistles.

With the other groups of Pauline letters Galatians is associated by ties less numerous and strong, yet marked enough to suggest, in conjunction with the general style, a common authorship.

4. With Other Groups of Epistles

The proportion of locutions peculiar to Gal and the 3rd group (Colossians-Philemon-Ephesians-Philippians) is 1 to each of their 15 chapters. The more noticeable of these are in Galatians-Colossians: "elements of the world," and the maxim, "There is no Jew nor Greek," etc., associated with the "putting on of Christ" ("the new man"); "fullness of the time" (or "seasons") and "householders of faith (of God)," also "Christ loved me (the church) and gave up himself for me (her)," in Galatians-Ephesians; "he that supplieth (your supplying of, epichōrēgı́a ) the Spirit," and "vain-glory" ( kenodoxı́a ), in Galatians-Philippians; "redeem" ( exagorázō ) and "inheritance" are peculiar to Gal with Colossians-Ephesians together; the association of the believer's "inheritance" with "the Spirit" in Galatians-Ephesians is a significant point of doctrinal identity.

The Thessalonians and Timothy-Titus (1st and 4th) groups are outliers in relation to Galatians, judged by vocabulary. There is little to associate our epistle with either of these combinations, apart from pervasive Corinthians-Romans phrases and the Pauline complexion. There are 5 such expressions registered for the 8 chapters of 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 7 for the 13 of 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus - just over one to two chapters for each group. While the verbal coincidences in these two cases are, proportionately, but one-half so many as those connecting Galatians with the 3rd group of epistles and one-fifth or one-sixth of those linking it to the 2nd group, they are also less characteristic; the most striking is the contrast of "well-doing" ( kalopoiéō ) with "fainting" or "wearying" ( egkakéō ) in  Galatians 6:9 and   2 Thessalonians 3:13 .

5. General Comparison

No other writing of Paul reflects the whole man so fully as this - his spiritual, emotional, intellectual, practical, and even physical, idiosyncrasy. We see less of the apostle's tenderness, but more of his strength than in Philippians; less of his inner, mystic experiences, more of the critical turns of his career; less of his "fears," more of his "fightings," than in 2 Corinthians. While the 2nd letter to Timothy lifts the curtain from the closing stage of the apostle's ministry, Gal throws a powerful light upon its beginning. The Pauline theology opens to us its heart in this document. The apostle's message of deliverance from sin through faith in the crucified Redeemer, and of the new life in the Spirit growing from this root, lives and speaks; we see it in Galatians as a working and fighting theology, while in Romans it peacefully expands into an ordered system. The immediately saving truth of Christianity, the gospel of the Gospel, finds its most trenchant utterance in this epistle; here we learn "the word of the cross" as Paul received it from the living Saviour, and defended it at the crisis of his work.

IV. The Destination and Date

1. Place and Time Interdependent

The question of the people to whom, is bound up with that of the time at which, the Epistle to the Galatians was written. Each goes to determine the other. The expression "the first time" ( tó próteron ) of  Galatians 4:13 presumes Paul to have been twice with the readers previously - for the first occasion, see   Galatians 4:13-15; for the second,  Galatians 1:9;  Galatians 5:3 . The explanation of Round ( Date of the Epistle to Galatians , 1906), that the apostle intended to distinguish his first arrival at the several (South) Galatian cities from his return in the course of the same journey (  Acts 14:21-23 ), cannot be accepted: Derbe, the limit of the expedition, received Paul and Barnabas but once on that round, and in retracing their steps the missionaries were completing an interrupted work, whereas  Galatians 4:13 implies a second, distinct visitation of the churches concerned as a whole; in   Acts 15:36 Paul looks back to the journey of Acts 13:14-14:26 as one event.

Now the apostle revisited the South Galatian churches in starting on the 2nd missionary tour ( Acts 16:1-5 ). Consequently, if his "Galatians" were Christians of Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra and Derbe (the South Galatian hypothesis), the letter was written in the further course of the 2nd tour - from Macedonia or Corinth about the time of 1 and 2 Thess (so Zahn, Introduction to the New Testament , I, English translation), or from Antioch in the interval between the 2nd and 3rd journeys (so Ramsay); for on this latter journey ( Acts 18:23 ) Paul ( ex hyp .) traversed 'the (South) Galatian country' a third time. On the other hand, if they were people of Galatia proper, i.e. of North (Old) Galatia, the epistle cannot be earlier than the occasion of  Acts 18:23 , when Paul touched a second time "the Galatian country," which, on this supposition, he had evangelized in traveling from South Galatia to Troas during the previous tour ( Acts 16:6-8 ). On the North Galatian hypothesis, the letter was dispatched from Ephesus during Paul's long residence there (Acts 19; so most interpreters, ancient and modern), in which case it heads the 2nd group of the epistles; or later, from Macedonia or Corinth, and shortly before the writing of the Epistle to the Romans (thus Lightfoot, Salmon, A. L. Williams and others).

Per contra , the earlier date, if proved independently, carries with it the South Galatian, the later date the North Galatian theory. The subscription of the Textus Receptus of the New Testament "written from Rome," rests on inferior manuscript authority and late Patristic tradition. Clemen, with no suggestion as to place of origin, assigns to the writing a date subsequent to the termination of the 3rd missionary tour (55 or 57 ad), inasmuch as the epistle reflects the controversy about the Law, which in Romans is comparatively mild, at an acute, and, therefore (he supposes), an advanced stage.

2. Internal Evidence

Lightfoot (chapter iii of Introduction to Commentary ) placed Galatians in the 2nd group of the epistles between 2 Corinthians and Romans, upon considerations drawn from "the style and character" of the epistle. His argument might be strengthened by a detailed linguistic analysis (see III, 1-3, above). The more minutely one compares Galatians with Romans and 1 and 2 Corinthians, the more these four are seen to form a continuous web, the product of the same experience in the writer's mind and the same situation in the church. This presumption, based on internal evidence, must be tested by examination of the topographical and chronological data.

3. External Data

(1) Galatia and the Galatians

The double sense of these terms obtaining in current use has been shown in the article on Galatia; Steinmann sets out the evidence at large in his essay on Der Leserkreis des Galaterbriefes , 61-76 (1908); see also A. L. Williams' Introduction to Galatians in Cambr. Greek Test. (1910). Roman authors of the period in using these expressions commonly thought of provincial Galatia (NOTE: Schürer seems to be right, however, in maintaining that "Galatia" was only the abbreviated designation for the province, named a parte potiori , and that in more formal description it was styled "Galatia, Pisidia, Phrygia," etc.) which then embraced in addition to Galatia proper a large tract of Southern Phrygia and Lycaonia, reaching from Pisidian Antioch in the west to Derbe in the east; but writers of Asia Minor leaned to the older local and national usage, according to which "Galatia" signified the north-central highlands of the peninsula, on both sides of the river Halys, in which the invading Galatae had settled long before this time. (On their history see the previous article) It is asserted that Paul strictly followed the official, as against the popular, usus loquendi in these matters - a questionable dictum (see A. L. Williams, op. cit., xix, xx, or Steinmann's Leserkreis , 78-104), in view of  Galatians 1:21 ,  Galatians 1:22 (note the Greek double article), to go no farther. There was nothing in Paul's Roman citizenship to make him a precisian in a point like this. Ramsay has proved that all four cities of Acts 13:14-14:23 were by this time included in provincial Galatia. Their inhabitants might therefore, officially, be styled "Galatians" ( Galatae ); it does not follow that this was a fit or likely compilation for Paul to use. Jülicher says this would have been a piece of "bad taste" on his part. The attachment of the southern districts (Phrygian, Pisidian, Lycaonian) to Galatia was recent - D erbe had been annexed so late as the year 41 - and artificial. Supposing that their Roman "colonial" rank made the designation "Galatians" agreeable to citizens of Antioch or Lystra, there was little in it to appeal to Iconians or Derbeans (compare Schmiedel, in EB , col. 1604).

(2) Prima Facie Sense of   Acts 16:6

The "Galatian country" ( Galatikḗ chṓra ) is mentioned by Luke, with careful repetition, in  Acts 16:6 and   Acts 18:23 . Luke at any rate was not tied to imperial usage; he distinguishes "Phrygia" from "Asia" in  Acts 2:9 ,  Acts 2:10 , although Phrygia was administratively parceled out between Asia and Galatia. When therefore "Asia" is opposed in  Acts 16:6 to "the Phrygian and Galatian country" (or "Phrygia and Galatian country," Zahn), we presume that the three terms of locality bear alike a non-official sense, so that the "Galatian country" means Old Galatia (or some part of it) lying to the Northeast, as "Asia" means the narrower Asia west of "Phrygia." On this presumption we understand that Paul and Silas, after completing their visitation of "the cities" of the former tour (  Acts 16:4 ,  Acts 16:5; compare  Acts 15:36 , in conjunction with 13:14 through 14:23), since they were forbidden to proceed westward and "speak the word in Asia," turned their faces to the region - first Phrygian, then Galatian - that stretched northward into new territory, through which they traveled toward "Mysia" and "Bithynia" ( Acts 16:7 ). Thus  Acts 16:6 fills in the space between the South Galatia covered by   Acts 16:4 and   Acts 16:5 , and the Mysian-Bithynian border where we find the travelers in  Acts 16:7 . Upon this, the ordinary construction of Luke's somewhat involved sentence, North Galatia was entered by Paul on his 2nd tour; he retraversed, more completely, "the Galatian region" at the commencement of the 3rd tour, when he found "disciples" there ( Acts 18:23 ) whom he had gathered on the previous visit.

(3) The Grammar of  Acts 16:6

In the interpretation of the Lukan passages proposed by Ramsay,  Acts 16:16 , detached from 16b, is read as the completion of  Acts 16:1-5 ('And they went through the Phrygian ... region. They were forbidden by the Holy Ghost ... in Asia, and came over against Mysia,' etc.); and "the Phrygian and Galatian region" means the southwestern division of Provincia Galatia, a district at once Phrygian (ethnically) and Galatian (politically). The combination of two local adjectives., under a common article, to denote the same country in different respects, if exceptional in Greek idiom (  Acts 15:41 and   Acts 27:5 illustrate the usual force of this collocation), is clearly possible - the one strictly parallel geographical expression, "the Iturean and Trachonite country" in   Luke 3:1 , unfortunately, is also ambiguous. But the other difficulty of grammar involved in the new rendering of  Acts 16:6 is insuperable: the severance of the participle, "having been forbidden" ( kōluthéntes ), from the introductory verb, "they went through" ( diḗlthon ), wrenches the sentence to dislocation; the aorist participle in such connection "must contain, if not something antecedent to 'they went,' at least something synchronous with it, in no case a thing subsequent to it, if all the rules of grammar and all sure understanding of language are not to be given up" (Schmiedel, EB , col. 1599; endorsed in Moulton's Prolegomena to the Grammar of New Testament Greek , 134; see also Chase in The Expositor , IV, viii, 404-11, and ix, 339-42).  Acts 10:29 ("I came ... when I was sent for") affords a grammatical parallel to   Acts 16:6 ('They went through ... since they were hindered').

Zahn's position is peculiar ( Intro to New Testament , I, 164-202). Rejecting Ramsay's explanation of  Acts 16:6 , and of  Acts 18:23 (where Ramsay sees Paul a third time crossing South Galatia), and maintaining that Luke credits the apostle with successful work in North Galatia, he holds, notwithstanding, the South Galatian view of the epistle. This involves the paradox that Paul in writing to "the churches of Galatia" ignored those of North Galatia to whom the title properly belonged - an incongruence which Ramsay escapes by denying that Paul had set foot in Old Galatia. In the 1st edition of the Einleitung Zahn had supposed North and South Galatia together included in the address; this supposition is contrary to the fact that the readers form a homogeneous body, the fruit of a single mission (  Galatians 4:13 ), and are affected simultaneously by the same disturbance ( Galatians 1:6;  Galatians 5:7-9 ). Associating the letter in 2nd edition with South Galatians alone, Zahn suggests that while Paul had labored in North Galatia and found "disciples" there on his return, these were too few and scattered to form "churches" - an estimate scarcely in keeping with Luke's phrase  Acts 5:7-9 "all the disciples" (  Acts 18:23 ), and raising a distinction between "disciples" and "churches" foreign to the historian's usage (see  Acts 6:2;  Acts 9:19;  Acts 14:20 ). We must choose between North and South Galatia; and if churches existed among the people of the north at the time of writing, then the northerners claim this title by right of use and wont - and the epistle with it. The reversal of "Galatian and Phrygia(n)" in  Acts 18:23 , as compared with  Acts 16:6 , implies that the apostle on the 3rd tour struck "the Galatian country" first, traveling this time directly North from Syrian Antioch, and turned westward toward Phrygia when he had reached Old Galatia; whereas his previous route had brought him westward along the highroad traversing South Galatia, until he turned northward at a point not far distant from Pisidian Antioch, to reach North Galatia through Phrygia from the southwest. See the Map of Asia Minor.

(4) Notes of Time in the Epistle

The "3 years" of  Galatians 1:18 and the "14 years" of   Galatians 2:1 are both seemingly counted from Paul's conversion. ( a ) The synchronism of the conversion with the murder of Stephen and the free action of the high priest against the Nazarenes ( Acts 9:2 , etc.), and of Saul's visit to Jerusalem in the 3rd year thereafter with Aretas' rule in Damascus ( 2 Corinthians 11:32 ,  2 Corinthians 11:33 ), forbid our placing these two events further back than 36 and 38 - at furthest, 35 and 37 ad (see Turner on "Chronology of the NT" in HDB , as against the earlier dating). ( b ) This calculation brings us to 48-49 as the year of the conference of  Galatians 2:1-10 - a date precluding the association of that meeting with the errand to Jerusalem related in   Acts 11:30 and   Acts 12:25 , while it suits the identification of the former with the council of Acts 15. Other indications converge on this as the critical epoch of Paul's apostleship. The expedition to Cyprus and South Galatia (Acts 13; 14) had revealed in Paul 'signs of the apostle' which the chiefs of the Judean church now r

Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature

the fourth in order of the Pauline epistles of the N.T., entitled simply, according to the best MSS. (see Tischendorf, N.T. ad loc.), Πρός Γαλάτας . (See the Mercersburg Review, January 1861.)

1. Authorship. — With regard to the genuineness and authenticity of this epistle, no writer of any credit or respectability has expressed any doubts. Its Pauline origin is attested not only by the superscription which it bears ( Galatians 1:1), if this be genuine, but also by frequent allusions in the course of it to the great apostle of the Gentiles ( Galatians 1:13-23;  Galatians 2:1-14). It is corroborated also by the style, tone, and contents of the epistle, which are perfectly in keeping with those of the apostle's other writings. The testimony of the early Church on this subject is most decided and unanimous (see Lardner, Works, volume 2). Besides express references to the epistle (Irenaeus, Haer. 3:7, 2; 5:21,1; Tertullian, De Praescr. ch. 60, al.), we have one or two direct citations found as early as the time of the apostolic fathers (Polyc. ad Philippians chapter 3), and several apparent allusions (see Davidson, Introd. 2:318 sq.). The attempt of Bruno Bauer (Kritik der Paulin. Briefe, Berlin, 1850) to demonstrate that this epistle is a compilation of later times, out of those to the Romans and to the Corinthians, has been treated by Meyer with a contempt and a severity (Vorrede, page 7; Einleit. page 8) which, it does not seem too much to say, are completely deserved.

2. Occasion, etc. — The parties to whom this characteristic letter was addressed are described in the epistle itself as "the churches of Galatia" ( Galatians 1:2; comp.  Galatians 3:1) in Asia Minor, otherwise called Gallogriecia (Strabo, 12:566) — a province that bore in its name its well- founded claim to a Gallic or Celtic origin (Pausanias, 1:4), and that now, after an establishment, first by predatory conquest, and subsequently by recognition but limitation at the hands of neighboring rulers (Strabo, 1.C.; Pausanias, 4:5), could date an occupancy, though not an independence, extending to more than three hundred years; the first subjection of Galatia to the Romans having taken place in B.C. 189 (Livy, 38:16 sq.), and its formal reduction (with territorial additions) to a regular Roman province in A.D. 26. (See Galatia).

Into this district the Gospel was first introduced by Paul himself ( Acts 16:6;  Galatians 1:8;  Galatians 4:13;  Galatians 4:19). Churches were then also probably formed, for on revisiting this district some time after his first visit it is mentioned that he "strengthened the disciples" ( Acts 18:23). These churches seem to have been composed principally of converts directly from heathenism ( Galatians 4:8), but partly, also, of Jewish converts, both pure Jews and proselytes. Unhappily, the latter, not thoroughly emancipated from early opinions and prepossessions, or probably influenced by Judaizing teachers who had visited these churches, had been seized with a zealous desire to incorporate the rites and ceremonies of Judaism (especially circumcision,  Galatians 5:2;  Galatians 5:11-12;  Galatians 6:12 sq.) with the spiritual truths and simple ordinances of Christianity. (See Cruse, De statu Galatarum, etc., Hafn. 1722.) So active had this party been in disseminating their views on this head through the churches of Galatia, that the majority at least of the members had been seduced to adopt them ( Galatians 1:6;  Galatians 3:1, etc.). To this result it is probable that the previous religious conceptions of the Galatians contributed; for, accustomed to the worship of Cybele, which they had learned from their neighbors the Phrygians, and to theosophistic doctrines with which that worship was associated, they would be the more readily induced to believe that the fullness of Christianity could alone be developed through the symbolical adumbrations of an elaborate ceremonial (Neander, Apostolisches Zeitalter, 2d edit. page 400). It would seem that on his last visit to this region, Paul found the leaven of Judaism beginning to work in the churches of Galatia, and that he then warned them against it in language of the most decided character ( Galatians 1:9;  Galatians 5:3). From some passages in this epistle (e.g.,  Galatians 1:11-24;  Galatians 2:1-21) it would appear also that insinuations had been disseminated among the Galatian churches to the effect that Paul was not a divinely-commissioned apostle, but only a messenger of the church at Jerusalem; that Peter and he were at variance upon the subject of the relation of the Jewish rites to Christianity; and that Paul himself was not at all times so strenuously opposed to those rites as he had chosen to be among the Galatians. Of this state of things intelligence having been conveyed to the apostle, he wrote this epistle for the purpose of vindicating his own pretensions and conduct, of counteracting the influence of these false views, and of recalling the Galatians to the simplicity of the Gospel which they had received. The importance of the case was probably the reason why the apostle put himself to the great labor of writing this epistle with his own hand ( Galatians 6:11).

3. Time And Place Of Writing. — On the date of this epistle great diversity of opinion prevails. (See Fischem, De Tempore Quo Ep. Ad G. scriptafuersit, s. Longos. 1808; Keil, De tempore, etc., in his Opusc. acad. page 351 sq.; also Ueb. d. Zeit. etc., in Tzschirner's Asalekten, 3:2, 55 sq., Niemeyer, De tempore, etc., Gott. 1827; Ulrich, Ueb. d. Abfassunqzeit, etc., in the Theol. Stud. n. Krit. 1836, 2:448 sq.). Marcion held this to be the earliest of Paul's letters (Epiphanius, adv. Hares. 42:9); and Tertullias is generally supposed to favor the same opinion, from his speaking of Paul's zeal against Judaismn displayed is this epistle as characteristic of his being yet a neophyte (adv. Marc. 1:20); though to us it does not appear that in this passage Tertullian is referring at all to the writing of this epistle, but only to Paul's personal intercourse with Peter and other of the apostles mentioned by him in the epistle ( Galatians 2:9-14). Michaelis also has given his suffrage in favor of a date earlier than that of the apostle's second visit to Galatia, and very shortly after that of his first. Koppe's view (Nov. Test. 6:7) is the same, though he supposes the apostle to have preached in Galatia before the visit mentioned by Luke is  Acts 16:6, and which is usually reckoned his first visit to that district. Others, again, such as Mill (Proleg. In Nov. Test . page 4), Calovius (Biblia Illust. 4:529), and, more recently, Schrader (Der Ap. Paulus, 1:226), place the date of this epistle at a late period of the apostle's life: the last, indeed, advocatest he date assigned in the Greek MSS., and in the Syrian and Arabic versions, which announce that it wag "written from Rome" during the apostle's imprisonment there.

But this subscription is of very little critical authority, and seems in every way improbable; it was not unlikely suggested by a mistaken reference of the expressions in  Galatians 6:17 to the sufferings of imprisonment. See Alford, Prolegomena, page 459. Lightfoot ( Journal of Sacred and Class. Philo. January 1857) urges the probability of its having been written at about the same time as the Epistle to the Romans, and finds it very unlikely that two epistles so nearly allied in subject and line of argument should have been separated in order of composition by the two epistles to the Corinthians. He would therefore assign Corinth as the place where the epistle was written, and the three months that the apostle staid there ( Acts 20:2-3) as the exact period. But when the language of the epistle to the Galatians is compared with that to the Romans, the similarity between the two is such as rather to suggest that the latter is a development at a later period, and in a more systematic form, of thoughts more hastily thrown out to meet a pressing emergency in the former. The majority of interpreters, however, concur in a medium view between these extremes, and fix the date of this epistle at some time shortly after the apostle's second visit to Galatia. From the apostle's abrupt exclamation in  Galatians 1:6, "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you," etc., it seems just to infer that he wrote this epistle not very long after he had left Galatia. It is true, as has been urged (see especially Conybeare and Howson's Life and Epistles of St. Paul 2:132), that Οὔτω Ταχέως in this verse may mean "so Quickly " as well as "so Soon ;" but the abruptness of the apostle's statement appears to us rather to favor the latter rendering; for, as a complaint of the Quickness of their change respected the manner in which it had been made, and as the apostle could be aware of that only by report, and as it was a matter on which there might be a difference of opinion between him and them, it would seem necessary that the grounds of such a charge should be stated; whereas if the complaint merely related to the shortness of time during which, after the apostle had been among them, they had remained steadfast in the faith, a mere allusion to it was sufficient, as it was a matter not admitting of any dieversity of opinion. We should consider, also, the obvious fervor and freshness of interest that seems to breathe through the whole epistle as an evidence that he had but lately left them.

The question, however, still remains, which of the two visits of Paul to Galatia mentioned in the Acts was it after which this epistle was written? In reply to this, Michaelis and some others maintain that it was the first, but in coming to this conclusion they appear to have unaccountably overlooked the apostle's phraseology (4:13), where he speaks of circumstances connected with his preaching the Gospel among the Galatians, Τὸ Πρότερον , The Former Time, an expression which clearly indicates that at the period this epistle was written Paul had been at least twice in Galatia. On these grounds it is probable that the apostle wrote and dispatched this epistle not long after he had left Galatia for the second time, and perhaps whilst he was residing at Ephesus (comp.  Acts 18:23;  Acts 19:1 sq.), i.e., A.D. 51. The apostle would in that city have been easily able to receive tidings of his Galatian converts; the dangers of Judaism, against which be personally warned them, would have been fresh in his thoughts; and when he found that these warnings were proving unavailing, and that even his apostolic authority was becoming undermined by a fresh arrival of Judaizing teachers, it is then that he would have written, as it were on the spur of the moment, in those terms of earnest and almost impassioned warning that so noticeably mark this epistle. The reasons which Michaelis urges for an earlier date are of no weight. He appeals, in the first place, to  Galatians 1:2, and asks whether Paul would have used the vague expression, "all the brethren," without naming them, had it not been that the parties in question were those by whose he had been accompanied on his first visit to Galatia, viz. Silas and Timothy, and, "perhaps, some others." The answer to this obviously is that had Paul referred in this expression to these individuals, who were known to the Galatians, he was much more likely, on that very account, to have named them than otherwise; and besides, the expressions "all the brethren that are with me" is much more naturally understood of a considerable number of persons, such as the elders of the church at Ephesus, than of two persons, and "perhaps some others."

Again, he urges the fact that, about the time of Paul's first visit to Galatia, Asia Minor was full of zealots for the law, and that consequently it is easier to account for the seduction of the Galatians at this period than at a later. But the passage to which Michaelis refers in support of this assertion ( Acts 15:1) simply informs us that certain Judaizing teachers visited Antioch, and gives us no information whatever as to the time when such zealots entered Asia Minor. In fine, he lays great stress on the circumtance that Paul, in recapitulating the history of his own life in the first and second chapters, brings the narrative down only to the period of the conference at Jerusalem, the reason of which is to be found, he thinks, in the fact that this epistle was written so soon after that event that nothing of moment had subsequently occurred in the apostle's history. But, even admitting that the period referred to in this second chapter was that of the conference mentioned Acts 15 (though this is much doubted by many writers of note), the reason assigned by Michaelis for Paul's carrying the narrative of his life no further than this cannot be admitted; for it overlooks the design of the apostle in furnishing that narrative, which was certainly not to deliver himself of a piece of mere autobiographical detail, but to show from certain leading incidents in his early apostolic life how from the first he had claimed and exercised an independent apostolic authority, and how his rights in this respect had been admitted by the pillars of the Church, Peter, James, and John. For this purpose it was not necessary that the narrative should be brought down to a lower date than the period when Paul went forth as the apostle of the Gentiles, formally recognized as such by the other apostles of Christ.

Some of the advocates of a date earlier than A.D. 50 suppose that the persons addressed under the name of Galatians were not the inhabitants of Galatia proper, but of Lystra and Derbe ( Acts 14:6), since among the seven districts into which Asia Minor was divided by the Romans the name of Lycaonia does not occur; the latter therefore, with its cities of Derbe and Lystra, must have been included in the province of Galatia, as indeed Pliny, (ist. Nat. 5:27) makes it a part thereof. (See Schmidt, De Galatas, etc., Hefeld. 1748.) It is urged, in addition, that, while copious details are given in Acts 14 respecting the founding of the Lycaonian churches, the first mention of Galatia ( Acts 16:6) is merely to the effect that Paul passed through that country. On these grounds Pasilus, Ulrich ( Stud. Und Ksrit. 1836), B Ö ttger, and others hold that under the term Περίχωρον , "the region round about" ( Acts 14:6), Galatia must be included; and therefore they put back the composition of the epistle to a date anterior to the apostolic council (Acts 15). It is certain, however, that Luke did not follow the Roman division into provinces (which, moreover, was frequently changed), because he specially mentions Lycaonia, which was no province, and distinguishes it from Galatia. As to the latter point, no valid inferences can be drawn from the comparative silence of the inspired history upon the details of Paul's labors in particular places, provided his presence there is clearly recorded, although in brief terms. There seems, therefore, no reason to depart from the common opinion that the apostle's first visit is recorded inActs 16:6; and consequently the epistle must have been written subsequently to the council (Acts 15). With this, too, the references in the epistle itself best agree. The visit to Jerusalem alluded to in  Galatians 2:1-10, is, on the best grounds, supposed to be identical with that of Acts 15 (A.D. 47); and the apostle speaks of it as a thing of the past. (See Paul).

4. Contents. — The epistle consists of three parts. In the first part (1, 2), which is apologetic, Paul vindicates his own apostolic authority and independence as a directly-commissioned ambassador of Christ to men and especially to the Gentile portion of the race. After an address and salutation, in which his direct appointment by heaven is distinctly asserted ( Galatians 1:1), and a brief doxology ( Galatians 1:5), the apostle expresses his astonishment at the speedy lapse of his converts, and reminds them how he had forewarned them that even if an angel preached to them another gospel he was to be anathema ( Galatians 1:6-10). The gospel he preached was not of men, as his former course of life ( Galatians 1:11-14), and as his actual history subsequent to his conversion ( Galatians 1:15-24), convincingly proved. When he went up to Jerusalem it was not to be instructed by the apostles, but on a special mission, which resulted in his being formally accredited by them. ( Galatians 2:1-10); nay, more, when Peter dissembled in his communion with Gentiles, he rebuked him, and demonstrated the danger of such in consistency ( Galatians 2:11-21). In the second part (3, 4), which is polemical, having been led to refer to his zeal for the great doctrine of salvation by the grace of God through faith in Christ, the apostle now enters at large upon the illustration and defense of this cardinal truth of Christianity. He appeals to the former experience of the Galaties. and urges specially the doctrine of justification, as evinced by the gift of the Spirit ( Galatians 3:1-5), the case of Abraham ( Galatians 3:6-9), the fact of the law involving a curse, from which Christ has freed us ( Galatians 3:10-14), and, lastly, the prior validity of the promise ( Galatians 3:16-18), and that preparatory character of the law ( Galatians 3:19-24) which ceased when faith in Christ and baptism into him had fully come ( Galatians 3:25-29). All this the apostle illustrates by a comparison of the nonage of an heir with that of bondage under the law: they were now sons ands inheritors ( Galatians 4:1-7); why, then, were they now turning back to bondage ( Galatians 4:8-11)? They once treated the apostle very differently ( Galatians 4:12-16); now they pay court to others, and awaken feelings of serious mistrust ( Galatians 4:17-20); and yet, with all their approval of the law, they show that they do not unederstand its deeper and more allegorical meanings ( Galatians 4:21-31). In the third part (5, 6), which is hortatory and admonitory, the Galatians are exhorted to stand fast in their freedom, and beware that they make not void their union with Christ (v5:1-6): their perverters, at any rate, shall be punished ( Galatians 5:7-12). The real fulfilment of the law is love ( Galatians 5:13-15): the works of the Spirit are what no law condemns, the works of the flesh are what exclude from the kingdom of God ( Galatians 5:16-26). The apostle further exhorts the spiritual to be forbearing ( Galatians 6:1-5), the taught to be liberal to their teachers, and to remember that as they sowed so would they reap ( Galatians 6:6-10). Then, after a noticeable recapitulation, and a contrast between his own conduct and that of the false teachers ( Galatians 6:11-16), and an affecting entreaty that they would trouble him no more ( Galatians 6:17), the apostle concludes with his usual benediction ( Galatians 6:18).

5. Commentaries. — The following are special exegetical helps on the whole of this epistle, the most important being designated by an asterisk [*] prefixed: Victorinus, Commentarii (in Mai, Script. Vet. III, 2:1); Jerome, Comasentarii (in Opp. 7:367; Opp. Suppos . 11:97, 9); Augustine, Expositio (in Opp . 4:1248); Chrysostom, Commentarius (in Opp . 10:779; also Erasmi, Opp. 8:267, tr. in Lib. of Fathers, Oxf. 1840, volume 6, 8vo); Cramer, Catena (volume 6); Claudius Taur., Commentarius (in Bibl. Max. Patr. 14:139); Aquinas, Expositio (in Opp. 7); *Luther, Commentarius (Lips. 1519, 4to, and often since; also in Opp. 3:1, etc.; tr. London, 1807, 1835, 8vo); also his fuller Commentarius (Vitemb. and Hag. 1535, 8vo, and later; both works also in Germ. often); Bugenhagen, Adnotationes (Basil. 1525, 8vo); Megander, Commentarius (Tigur. 1:533, 8vo); Seripandus, Commenataria (in his work on Romans, Lugd. 1541, 8vo; also separately, Antw. 1565, 8vo, and later); Calvin, Commentaries et lemones (both in Opp.; the former tr. Edinb. 1854, 8vo; the latter, Lond. 1574, 4to); Meyer, Adnotationes, (Berne, 1546, Hanosa. 1602, 8vo); Sarcer, Adnotationes (Frankfort, 1542, 8vo); Salmeron, Disputationes (in Opp. 15); Major, Enarratio (Vitemb. 1560, 8mo; also in German ib. eod.); Musculus, Commentarius (Basil. 1561, 1569, fol.); Cogelerus, Solationes (Vitemb. 1564, 8vo); Chytraeus, Enarratio (Franc. 1569, 8vo); Heshusins, Commentarius (Helmst. 1579, 8vo); Wigand, Adnotatioae (Vitemb. 1580; Lips. 1596, 8vo); Grynous, Asnalysis (Basil. 1583, 4to); Cornesus, Commentarius [after Luther] (Heidelb. 1583, 8vo); Prime, Exposition (Oxford, 1587, 8mo); Heilbrunner, Commentarius (Lansug. 1591, 8vo); Perkins, Commentary (in Works, 2:153; Cambr. 1601, Lond. 1603; in Latin, Genev. 1611, 2 volumes, fol.); Rollock, Analysis (London, 1602, Geneva, 1603, 8vo); Hoe, Commentarius (Lips. 1605, 4to); Winckelmann, Commentarius (Giess. 1608, 8vo) Weinrich, Exposi (Lips. 1610, 4to); Betuleius: Paraphrasis (Halle, 1612, 1617, 8vo); Battus, Commentarii (Gryphisen. 1613, 4to); Lyser, Analysis (Lips. 1616, 4to); Pareus, Commentarius (Heidelb. 1621, 4to; also in Opp. 3); Crell, Commentarius (Raconigi. 1628, 8vo; also in Opp. 1:373); Coutzen, Commentarius (Colossians and Mog. 1631, folio); Himmel, Commentarius (Jena, 1641, 4to); Lithmann, Συζήτησις (Upsal. 1641, 4to); Weininann, Exercitationes (Altorf. 1647, 4to); Terser, Analysis (Upsal. 1649, 4to); Lushington, Conmmentary (Lond. 1650, fol.); Cocceius, Conmmentarius (Opp. 5.); also Explicatio (Ib. 12:199); Feurborn, Expositio (Giess. 1653,1669, 4to); Chemnitz, Colleg I Um (Jen. 1656, 1663, 4to); *Kunadus, Disputationes (Vitemb. 1658, 4to); Ferguson, Exposition (Edinb. 1657, Lond. 1841, 8vo); Lagus, Commentatio (Gryph. 1664, 4to); *Stolberg, Lectiones (Vitemb. 1667, 4to); Kronnayer, Commentarius (Lips. 1670, 4to); Moommas, Meditationes (Hag. 1678, 8vo); Van der Waeyen, Verklaaring (Lebard. 1682, 8vo; also in Latin, Franecker, 1681, 4to); *Steengracht, Vitlegging (Ench. 1688, 4to); *Schmid, Commentatio (Kilon. 1690, Hamb. 1696,1704, 4to); Leydekker, in ep. ad Galatians (Tr. ad Rh. 1694, 8vo); *Akersloot, an de Galatians (Leyd. 1695, 4to; in German, Brem. 1699, 4to); *Spener, Erklarung (F.a.M. 1677, 1714, 4to); Aurivilius, Animadversiones (Halle, 1702, 4to); Locke, Paraphrase (Lond. 1705, 1733, 4to); Weisius, Commentarius (Helmst. 1705, 4to); Mayer, Dissertationes (Grypl. 1709, 8vo); Van Dyck, Anmerking (Amst. 1710, 8vo); Boston, Paraphrase (in Works, 6:240); Hazevoet, Verklaaring (Leyd. 1720, 4to); Vitringa, De br. an d. Galatians (Franeq. 1728, 4to); *Plevier, Verklaaring (Leyden, 1738, 4to); Rambach, Erklarung (Giess. 1739, 4to); Murray, Erklarung (Lips. 1739, 8vo); Wessel, Commentarius (L. Bat. 1750, 4to); Hoffmann, Introductio (Lips. 1750, 4to); *Struensee, Erklarung (Flensb. 1764, 4to); Baumgarten, Auslegung (Hal. 1767, 4to); Michaelis, Anmerk. (2d ed. Gotting. 1769, 4to); Zacharia, Erklar. (Gotting. 1770, 8vo); Moldenhauer, Erklarung (Hamb. 1773, 8vo); Cramer, Versuch (in the Beitrdge zu Beford. 1:112 sq.); Chandler, Parcapthrase (London, 1777, 4to); Weber, Anmerkungen (Lpz. 1778, 8vo); Semler, Paraphrasis (Hal. 1779, 8vo); Lavater, Uezschreibung (in Pfenniger's Magaz. 1:33-72); Riccaltoun, Notes (in Works, 3); Anon. Erklar. (in the Beitrage zu Beford. 5:126 sq.); Esmarch, Uebersetzung (Flensburg, 1784); Schutze, Scholia (Ger. 1784, 4to); Roos, Aus L Egueng (Tub. 1784, 1786, 8vo); Mayer, Anmerk. (Wien, 1788, 8vo); Krause, Anmerkungen (Frkf. 1788, 8vo); Stroth, Erklar. (in Eichhorn's Report. 4:41 sq.); Schilling, Anmerkungen (Leipzig, 1792, 8vo); Carpzov, Uebersetzung (Helmstadt, 1794, 8vo); Morus, Acroases (Lips. 1795, 8vo); also Erklar. (Gorl. 1798, 8vo); Anonym. Anmerl. (in Henke's Magaz. 2:22); Bair, Explicatio (Frcft. 1798, 8vo); Hensler, Anmerk. (Lpz. 1805); Borger, Interpretatio (L. Bat. 1807, 8vo); *Winer, Commentarius (Lips. 1821, 1828, 1829, 1859, 8vo); Anon. Uebers. (Neust. 1827, 8vo); Flatt, Vorles. (Tub. 1828, 8vo); Paulus, Erlauterung (Heidelb. 1831, 8vo); Hermann, In primis 3 cap. (Lips. 1832,4to); *Usteri, Commentar (Zur. 1833, 8vo); *Matthies, Erklarung (Oreifs. 1833, 8vo); *Ruckert, Commentar. (Lpz. 1833, 8vo); Fritzsche, De nonnullis locis, etc. (Rostock, 1833-4, 4to); Zschocke, Erklarung (Halle, 1834, 8vo); Schott, Erklar. (Lpz. 1834, 8vo); Sardinoux, Commentaire (Valence, 1837, 8vo) Windischmann, Erklarung (Mainz, 1843, 8vo); Barnes, Notes (N.Y. 1844, 12mo); Baumgarten-Crusius, Galaterbrief (in Exeg. Schriften, II, 2), Haldane, Exposition (London, 1848, 8vo); Olshausen, Commentary (tr. Edinb. 1851, 8vo); *Hilgenfeld, Erklarung (Halle, 1852, 8vo); Brown, Exposition (Edinb. 1853, 8vo); Muller, Erklarung (Hamb. 1853, 8vo); *Ellicott, Commentary (Lond. 1854,1859, Andov. 1864, 8vo); *Turner, Commentary (N.Y. 1855, 8vo); Jatho, Erlauterung (Hildesheim, 1856, 8vo); Anasker, Auslegung (Lpz. 1856, 8vo); Meyer, Galaterbrief (in Commentar, 7, Gotting. 1857, 8vo); Bagge, Commentary (London, 1857, 8vo); Frana, Commentarius (Goth. 1857, 8vo); Twele, Predigten (Hann. 1858, 8vo) * Wieseler, Commentar (Gotting. 1859, 8vo); Jowett, Notes (in Epistle, 1, London, 1859, 8vo); Gwinne, Commentary (Dubl. 1863, 8vo); Lightfoot, Notes (Lond. 1855, 8vo); Reithmayer, Commentar (Munch. 1865, 8vo); Vomel; Anmerk. (Freft. a.M. 1865, 8vo); Matthias, Erkldrunag (Cassel, 1865, 8vo); *Eadie, Commentary (Glasg. 1869, 8vo); Brandes, Freiheitsbrief (Wiesb. 1869, 8vo). (See Epistle).

The Nuttall Encyclopedia

An epistle of St. Paul to the churches in Galatia, which was an especial favourite with Luther, as, with its doctrine of spiritual freedom in Christ, it might well be, for it corroborated the great revelation first made to him by a neighbour monk; "man is not saved by singing masses, but by the grace of God"; it is a didactic epistle, in assertion, on the one hand, of freedom from the law, and, on the other, of the power of the spirit.