Galatians
1. INTRODUCTION (1:1–10)
A. Salutation (1:1–5). The apostle Paul follows typical Greek letter-writing protocol with an introduction that cites the name of the author and those addressed, followed by a greeting. Contrary to his other letters, here Paul gives only the briefest of greetings. His style is proper and a bit curt and immediately evidences a defense of his apostolic origin. The attacks against him appear to have revolved around the origin of his apostleship and, with it, the basis of his authority in that role. Unfortunately for him, his claim to the same apostolic authority as that of the original disciples of Jesus (Gl 2:6–10; 1 Co 9:1–27) was one that could not be independently verified.
In the opening words of the letter, Paul defends the source of his apostolic calling (1:1). Paul lists “Jesus Christ” first as the one through whom the commissioning was made, with “God the Father” as the ultimate source of the appointment. Though he acknowledges the greetings of others to the Galatians (1:2), Paul seems to have little time or desire for pleasantries. His wish for “grace . . . and peace” to them leads him into a further enunciation of the good news of redemption found in Christ (1:3). Paul reminds the Galatians that redemption is solely the work of God in Jesus Christ. Jesus sacrificially gave himself (see Rm 5:6, 8; 1 Co 15:3), resulting in our rescue (1:4). The use of the term “age” makes an eschatological distinction between the period under sin and the newness of life offered by the work of God in Christ (see 1 Co 1:20; Eph 2:2; 6:12), for which Paul ascribes glory to God (1:5).
B. Occasion for writing (1:6–9). 1:6–7. Paul moves quickly to express condemnation for the Galatians’ recent actions in a paragraph that is noteworthy for its emotional intensity. He is “amazed” (1:6) not only by the apparent departure of the Galatians from what he will argue is the core of the gospel but also by their lack of endurance with the truth. Such a desertion is a rejection of God himself!
Paul states that they have deserted the gospel for “another” (1:7) and “different” (1:6) gospel, indicating that Paul views their error as a serious departure from the truth of the apostolic good news. We receive our first hint that the difficulties are the results of a special interest group here. The agitators are described as those wishing to confuse the Galatians by perverting the gospel.
1:8–9. The seriousness of the situation is established by the two “curse” (Gk anathema, “a curse be on him!”) statements. Anathema referred to the dedication of an object, usually in pagan temples, for the purpose of its destruction. Quite simply, nothing or no one had the authority to override the truth of the gospel (including Paul himself or even angels; 1:8). Ultimately it is not to the messenger that one gives allegiance but to the one whom the message is about.
The landscape of the area of Galatia, present-day south-central Turkey
C. Review of accusations (1:10). Because most of Paul’s Letters were occasional letters (prompted in response to problems existing in the churches addressed), we must reconstruct the sense of the whole conversation with only a few clues on which to proceed. Paul asks a series of rhetorical questions, each with an intended negative answer. They give us an indication of the types of accusations being made by those who were casting doubt on Paul.
The Greek grammar of 1:10 indicates that Paul’s questions are prompted by his previous pronouncement of anathema. Paul appears to be reviewing accusations, presumably from the agitators (1:7), that his preaching of free grace was motivated by an attempt to win a vast following for his ministry. Paul’s previous anathemas (1:8–9) were designed to show that it was not popularity he sought but faithfulness to the gospel. The final statement of this verse indicates that if pleasing humanity were his goal, being a “servant of Christ” would not be the most logical way to proceed.
2. PAUL AND THE NATURE OF HIS APOSTLESHIP (1:11–2:21)
Apparently part of the process used to sway the Galatians from Paul’s influence was to cast doubt on his credentials as an apostle. While we have no way of evaluating the possibility that a countermission to Paul may have been authorized by an official or officials of the Jerusalem church, such a claim was apparently believed by the Galatians.
Paul’s defense of the mysterious conversion experience he claimed has to center on the only evidence he has: his changed life. In order to reestablish his right to direct the Galatians in their spiritual affairs, Paul recounts his own claim to apostleship and establishes that the apostles in Jerusalem recognize the equality of his apostolic standing with them.
A. Preconversion days (1:11–14). 1:11–12. As when he denied human agency in his apostolic calling (1:1), Paul makes it clear that no one has been involved in his own understanding of the gospel. This denial involves three specific areas that may have been alleged sources for the gospel Paul represents (1:11–12a): (1) it is not “of human origin” (from him or anyone else); (2) it has not been handed down by tradition; (3) he has not been instructed in it.
In addition to the three reports of Paul’s conversion in Acts (Ac 9; 22; 26), Paul refers to his own conversion here in Gl 1.
Paul states the gospel came to him through the very revelation of Jesus’s presence during the Damascus Road postresurrection appearance (1:12b; see Ac 9). The reality of the incarnate life, death, resurrection, exaltation, and future return of Jesus allows everything Paul knows of God to fall into proper perspective. The specifics of the history and doctrine are secondary to the reality revealed in him (1:16) at his conversion.
1:13–14. Paul appeals to their own knowledge of his former superior standing in Judaism and his own attempts to “destroy” the church (1:13). As a conscientious Pharisee, Paul was highly acclaimed among his peers and was able to name the revered rabbi Gamaliel as his mentor (see Ac 22:3). He mentions his advancement in the “traditions of my ancestors” (1:14), which would have involved intense study of the Scriptures and the teachings of the rabbinical sages.
B. Conversion (1:15–17). What becomes clear is Paul’s emphasis on the full agency of God in his commissioning as an emissary of the gospel message (1:15). Paul expresses this calling in terms reminiscent of the callings of the prophets Isaiah (Is 49:1) and Jeremiah (Jr 1:5). Such terminology would, no doubt, sting his Jewish-oriented opponents.
The revelation of God’s Son in Paul (1:16) had as its purpose the consecration of an individual to preach the gospel to the Gentiles. This is a decisive calling for Paul, one that allows him to claim an equality of apostolic standing with Peter, who in Paul’s view was specifically chosen to lead the mission to the Jews (2:8).
Paul’s response to this dramatic change was not to seek counsel or explanation from Jerusalem or from anyone else (1:17). Rather, Paul headed into the region of Arabia. The text does not specify what he did while there. The reason he mentions it is to show he did not consult with Jerusalem. After a stay of some undetermined time, he returned to Damascus.
C. First meeting with Jerusalem leadership (1:18–24). Paul’s desire was to show that he did not owe allegiance to Jerusalem. Further, he wanted to show that it was the opponents who would have to submit to his authority in Galatia, since he had been recognized by the major Jerusalem apostles as leading the Gentile mission and preaching the true gospel.
1:18–20. Paul’s first visit to Jerusalem is said to have occurred “after three years” (1:18). This reference and the one in 2:1 to “fourteen years” have proved to be problematic in understanding Pauline chronology. In general, many scholars prefer to see Paul’s conversion to be the operative starting point (with AD 32–33 as a likely date for it) and AD 35–36 as the date of the visit Paul mentions here. This occasion most likely aligns with the reference in Ac 9:26–30.
The three years between his conversion and the meeting of any of the Jerusalem officials emphasizes the independent nature of Paul’s work. When he did go up to Jerusalem, he had the opportunity to “get to know” only Cephas (Aramaic name for Peter—likely the nickname Jesus actually used for him; see Mt 16:18) and James (1:18–19). The visit did not last long (fifteen days). This seems to be a crucial point for Paul: in all this time, he has had extremely limited contact with the Jerusalem leadership. He makes it clear that he and Barnabas undertook the ambitious first missionary journey without being supervised in any way by Jerusalem. This display of independence would serve to deflate the opponents’ accusations.
1:21–24. After Jerusalem, it was on to the regions of Syria and Cilicia (Antioch was in Syria, Tarsus in Cilicia), with no further contact with Jerusalem or anywhere else in Judea (1:21). The news about his changed life was known in Judea only by reputation (1:22–23). While that evoked glory to God (1:24), it brought no formal relationship between Paul and Jerusalem.
D. Second meeting with Jerusalem leadership (2:1–10). The second meeting with Jerusalem is fraught with far more problems for Paul (2:1–5). If we are correct in assuming that this section represents the same visit as that detailed in Ac 15, then Paul has the task of explaining why he went to Jerusalem at all if he did not need to appear to defend his ministry before those who had the power to direct it.
2:1–2. The mention of his fellow traveler Barnabas and the taking along of Titus (a representative of the harvest won in the Gentile lands) in 2:1 place Paul in the position of an independent expert on Jewish-Gentile relations. He adds that his coming also had an element of compulsion to it—initiated by divine revelation (2:2), not from the authority of Jerusalem. Paul also had his own purpose for attending the conference. It was imperative for the leader of the Gentile mission to have the trust and support of the Jerusalem church and to avoid the threat of continual schism. The animosity characterizing Jewish-Gentile relations was not going to be eradicated easily.
Thus, when Paul mentions that he submitted the content of his preaching to “those recognized as leaders” (2:2), he is not saying that he sought their correction. Rather, they met in private in order to bring a united front to the conference. Disagreement on these issues would certainly have led to a split and weakened church. This is likely what he has in mind when he adds that he was concerned about “running . . . in vain.”
2:3–5. There has been much debate about 2:3–5 due to some variations in the manuscripts and the awkward grammatical connections of these verses. The most likely meaning of the text pictures a confrontation precipitated by those demanding circumcision for Gentiles, which was further complicated by the presence of Titus. Paul firmly makes it known that there was no compromise of his position, either by himself or by Titus (2:3). It is hard to know the identity of the “compeller.” Despite the arguments of the legalists, the leadership refused to compel Titus (and, by implication, any Gentile) to add any additional qualifications for Gentile fellowship in the church beyond an individual’s faith in Jesus Christ.
Were these opponents even Christians? Paul’s use of “false brothers” in 2:4 and in a similar context in 2 Co 11:26 suggests he is indicating that the nature of the doctrine taught by such opponents excludes their membership in the faith. This view is further enhanced by Paul’s disclaimer in 2:5 that his delegation never even gave a moment’s hesitation on the matter.
2:6. While Paul is satisfied by the decision of the Jerusalem Council, he is just as concerned to show the Galatians that the leadership in Jerusalem made a specific point of also recognizing the apostolic authority he possesses. The point is that Paul gave them no more recognition than they deserved, while they recognized the validity of his ministry (2:6–10).
The phrase “those recognized as important” (2:6) recalls the individuals with whom Paul met prior to the confrontation with Titus (2:2). He repeats the vague reference to their authority four times (2:2, 6 [2x], 9). Each use of the term appears to refer to the same three leaders, James, Cephas, and John, who are also identified by the term “pillars” in 2:9.
In 2:6, Paul’s digression about God’s not showing favoritism provides a theological basis for his behavior. One would expect Paul to show some deference to these men (at least to Cephas and John). But Paul desires to show that his confidence in his commissioning was not dependent on their approval.
2:7–10. The results of this meeting with the “pillars” (2:9) are important for Paul’s purposes, and he discusses them carefully. While Paul is pleased that these men recognized his authority, he wants to be very sure that such recognition does not appear as a type of commissioning. Paul arrived with the same status with which he departed; nothing was added to him (2:6). The real change occurs in the minds of the pillars. The results are well worth noting: (1) They recognized that Paul was entrusted by God with the Gentile missionary enterprise (2:7). (2) The authority of Peter and Paul was equated, each in his own sphere of operation (2:8–9). (3) They parted as equal partners in the overall enterprise of evangelization (2:9). (4) The one additional comment made by the Jerusalem leaders, concerning sensitivity to the poor, really did not need to be stated, since Paul already had that area of need in mind (2:10).
Paul’s statement that “God does not show favoritism” (Gl 2:6; cf. Rm 2:11) reflects a Hebrew idiom of not “looking at the face.” That is, God does not look at outward appearances (Dt 10:17; 1 Sm 16:7; cf. Ac 10:34).
The statement in 2:7–8 could be regarded as a type of semiquotation of an official document or of an oral agreement that was reached at the council. The recognition of various spheres of responsibility is stated in terms Paul probably would not use (see 1:7–9; he would likely avoid any implications that two gospels were being preached). The statement affirms the equality of Peter’s and Paul’s commissioning and responsibility to the people groups (Jews and Gentiles) to which they were sent by the grace of God.
E. Correcting Cephas (2:11–21). 2:11. The incident related in 2:11–14 moves us on to the next logical step in Paul’s argument. The authorities in Jerusalem had recognized Paul’s equal status relative to them, but in Paul’s view they also acknowledged his priority over matters dealing with Gentiles. Thus, when Paul confronted Peter at Antioch, he did so in rightful exercise of his authority, since Peter was wrong in regard to his treatment of Gentile believers. The implication is clear for the Galatians. Those who are appealing to Jerusalem as the ground for their authority should recognize that Jerusalem has relinquished its authority over such matters to Paul, since they have shown themselves (as represented by Peter) to have lacked the proper sensitivity and theological insight on these matters in the past.
2:12–13. Peter theoretically agreed with the equal status of Gentiles, even to the point of eating with them. Paul indicates both acceptance and hesitancy by Peter to the practice of having full fellowship with the Gentile believers. The inconsistency in Peter’s actions is blamed on the arrival of a group alternately described as “certain men . . . from James” and as “those from the circumcision party” (2:12). Clearly Peter gave in to the ethnic bias of the arriving Jewish contingent. Peter, it seems, was not alone in this problem of integrating faith with living, since even Barnabas followed his example, as well as other Jews present (2:13). From Paul’s description here, it is clear that he places the blame on Peter, since Peter’s action influenced a similar response by Barnabas and the rest of the Jews. Paul describes their departure from the Gentile table fellowship as “hypocrisy” (2:13).
2:14. Paul’s public rebuke came because Peter’s action appeared to have been the culmination of a series of indiscretions that indicated a continuing bias against Gentiles by the Jewish members of the church. Peter’s indiscretion was not just a diplomatic mistake but was related to the very heart of the good news itself. As Paul articulates in Romans, Ephesians, and elsewhere, Jewish ethnic privileges do not give them any superiority over Gentiles. The work of Christ has united Jews and Gentiles in one people of God. In this section Paul has shown why the gospel is compromised through ethnic favoritism. Moving toward the opponents’ position is nothing more than a giant step backward.
2:15. This new section (2:15–21) focuses on the theological grounding for which Paul demonstrates that Jews and Gentiles are equal and unified in Christ. As in Romans, it is his discussion of justification by faith that does the heavy lifting. Paul acknowledges his own position among the “Jews by birth” but goes on to explain that this “advantage” should help them see all the more that Christ’s work alone is the ground for justification. Paul, then, has not denied the Jewish advantage; he only shows that the advantage in itself is not enough to provide a right standing with God.
Paul accused Peter of hypocrisy, of wearing a spiritual mask, when he withdrew from fellowship with Gentiles (Gl 2:13). This relief shows ancient comedy masks worn by actors.
2:16. This is the key verse of the section. We find a repetitive treatment of the doctrine of justification by faith here. Paul states that it is through the “faith in Jesus Christ” (or the “faithfulness of Jesus Christ”; see the CSB footnote) that justification comes, not through “the works of the law.” The particular works on which Paul focuses in Galatians are dietary regulations (as in 2:11–14) and circumcision. Paul is adamant that these rites do not serve as the basis of right standing with God, which would mean that Gentiles were largely excluded. Rather, Jesus’s life, death, and resurrection are sufficient.
“Law” here is not the villain of the story. Rather, it is a person’s inappropriate use of the law that is in view. Paul, in the more elaborate argument found in Romans (esp. Rm 2:12–15; 7:7–25), establishes the validity of the Mosaic law as a fundamental expression of the righteousness of God. Yet, too, the law displays itself as the accuser of persons (see Gl 3:10–13) and the vehicle through which they recognize their own sin and sinful inclinations (Rm 7:13–14). When presenting works of the law as in opposition to faith, Paul is rejecting Jewish rites as necessary for Gentile inclusion in the people of God.
2:17–18. For many, the problem with Paul’s teaching was in pressing the implication that a believer no longer had to keep the Mosaic law. If Gentiles accept Christ and do as they please, does that then mean that Christ is a “promoter of sin” (likely an opponent’s slogan, 2:17)? Paul strongly answers with his characteristic “Absolutely not!”
The reason for Paul’s objection is quite clear. If the works of the law are necessary for justification, then Gentiles must submit to them or still be in sin. This was not, however, what Paul and the apostles established, as he argued earlier. Thus, if Paul (note the change from the plural “we” to the singular “I” in 2:18–21, apparently speaking on behalf of Jewish Christians) lives “like a Gentile” (as Paul accused Peter in 2:14) while forcing Gentiles to “live like Jews,” then he shows himself to be a sinner. Rather, the law, which Paul in Rm 7–8 argues is unable to free human flesh from sin, created a barrier between Jews and Gentiles that has been torn down in Christ, and it must not be erected again (2:18). Thus Paul is adamant that if the law can set sinners free from sin, Jesus died for nothing (2:21)!
2:19–21. The believer’s new life is forever wedded to that of Christ and characterized by the nature of Christ (2:20). Paul describes the mystical union of the believer with Christ, here and throughout the NT, by such expressions as “living in Christ” or “Christ lives in me” (see, e.g., Rm 6:4–8; 8:2–11; 2 Co 5:17; Col 2:12–14). With this reality, the power to live righteously resides in the believer (through the power of the Spirit, which Paul will soon explain).
Concluding this section, Paul reflects a charge his opponents likely used against him (2:21). In viewing him as one who has rejected the law of God for a form of antinomianism (the belief that one is governed by no laws), they believe he has nullified the gracious acts of God in revealing himself to Israel through the law (see also Ac 21:20–26). However, as Paul indicates, their conclusion is based on the false assumption that works of the law are a necessity for those in Christ. Paul carries their position to its logical—and devastating—conclusion. Their position nullifies the significance of the death of Christ. The so-called Jewish advantage has actually become a hindrance to the full appreciation of the new life to be found in Christ.
3. TREATISE: THE EFFICACY OF GRACE OVER LAW (3:1–4:7)
A. The argument from experience (3:1–5). 3:1. The next section proceeds from the logical conclusion of the opponents’ “gospel”: “Christ died for nothing” (2:21). Paul refers to his audience as “you foolish Galatians” (3:1), since the very idea of being attracted to a viewpoint that had as its ultimate result the utter rejection of the necessity of Christ’s death must be ridiculed as sheer folly.
Paul reminds them that “Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified” before their very eyes. It is also likely that he is being quite literal here, since it was not at all unusual for those who preached religious or philosophical messages to actually act them out in dramatic form before their audiences.
3:2–3. The second rhetorical question of this section is a key to understanding Paul’s definition of authentic Christian experience. As to whether they have really attained the goal of being in Christ (see 2:20), Paul wants to hear from the Galatians just one thing—whether they received the Spirit by works or by faith (3:2). Receiving the Spirit (i.e., the Spirit of Christ, the Holy Spirit) was the fundamental mark of authentic inclusion in the body of Christ. The reception of the Holy Spirit was an eschatological promise associated with the unique ministry of Jesus himself and a fulfillment of the covenantal promises of God made throughout the OT.
Thus Paul launches into an elaboration of why he calls them foolish (3:3). After receiving the Spirit by faith, are the Galatians now going to attempt to receive the Spirit by adding on the works of the law? The foolishness is, of course, in attempting to do something to gain what they have already received.
3:4–5. Paul appears to refer to some experiences otherwise unknown to us. Asking if they have “experience[d] so much for nothing” (3:4) may well relate to the common opposition that believers in Christ received from their fellow countrymen and from non-Christian Jewish zealots. Paul’s hopeful addition to this question indicates that under the present series of questions lies a questioner who would not even allow the possibility of failure to be the result of his work in Galatia (see 1:7).
Paul continues his contrasts by asking if the miracles worked among them were done from within the works of the law or through faith (3:5). The answer is obvious. The miraculous (which may refer to specific miracles that occurred in Galatia or to the receipt of the Spirit) occurred apart from the works of the law being pressed upon them by the Judaizers.
B. The argument from Scripture (3:6–18). Paul turning to the example of Abraham was most likely not coincidental (3:6–9). Rather, it is probable that the Jewish opponents used Abraham as the prototypical saint of God, the one who received the OT covenant, which had circumcision as its sign. Their argument may have been that if Gentiles wished to receive the benefits of that covenant, then they also must accept its accompanying sign and legal prescriptions.
Paul uses the Abraham story to make two major points: (1) Abraham’s righteous standing before God occurred prior to the institution of circumcision and the Mosaic law, and (2) Abraham’s righteous standing before God was made possible through a gracious declaration of God, in acceptance of Abraham’s belief.
3:6–7. On the basis of the proposition in 3:6, Paul concludes that, contrary to the opponents’ views, the true children of Abraham must be those who enter into peace with God in the same way as Abraham (3:7). Abraham becomes the prime example of the effectiveness of faith, since his justification occurred prior to the ceremonial rite of circumcision and centuries before the revealing of the law (see 3:17). In the old covenant as well as the new, it is faith in the promise of God that is the operative element (see Rm 4:14, 16, 18–25). The implication for the Galatians is obvious: whoever is not among “those who have faith” (3:7; as opposed to those who rely on “the works of the law,” 3:2, 5) is neither a child of Abraham nor a child of God.
3:8–9. Finishing these thoughts, Paul uses an unusual expression, which personifies Scripture as being able to foresee the future when it spoke concerning Abraham (3:8). For Paul, the good news of Jesus (his life, death, burial, resurrection, and future return) is a fulfillment of the covenant made with Abraham to bless the nations through him (Gn 12:3). The foregoing section is summarized in 3:9, showing that faith, not ethnic background, is humanity’s only way to appropriate the same covenantal blessings announced to Abraham.
Paul demonstrates that righteousness comes by faith rather than by keeping the law by showing how God’s promise came to Abraham hundreds of years before the law was given to Moses.
3:10–14. Paul indicates that the law (the Mosaic covenant) was not “based on faith” (i.e., not given to Abraham before God made his promises) and therefore should not be viewed as binding on Gentile Christians as the circumcision party contended (3:12). Thus, contrary to the opponents’ beliefs, Paul shows that obedience to the law is not required for justification. Paul does not elaborate here as he does in Rm 7 that the law, though a good gift from God, cannot bring life from death. It seems likely this is what he references by the curse of the law (3:10). Jesus’s death and resurrection did what the law could not do (3:13–14; cf. Rm 8:1–4). It dealt with sin and death once and for all to free humanity from their power, even the power they exercised over God’s good law (cf. Rm 7:7–12).
3:15–18. Now Paul attempts to show that one subsequent covenant cannot violate the provisions of a previous covenant (3:15). Specifically, another agreement, made some 430 years later (3:17), cannot alter the provisions of the covenant made earlier with Abraham. Covenantal agreements were made under the most sober circumstances, calling for a life-and-death commitment from the participants. They were not easily entered into or easily altered. Simply put, Paul is arguing that the promises made to Abraham are not constrained by the Mosaic covenant. The promise was for all the nations (including Israel), while the law was for Israel alone. Paul is adamant that the latter does not constrain the former.
C. The purpose of the law (3:19–25). Characteristically, Paul proceeds to argue his case by presenting the presumed objections of a hypothetical opponent (see, e.g., Rm 3:9, 27; 6:1, 15; 7:7; 11:1). Here he does not wish to imply that the Mosaic law was either unnecessary or without a place in salvation history. His arguments call for an understanding of the law as a vehicle for pointing to God’s grace.
3:19–20. Paul points out the purpose of the law (3:19). The law was given to Israel as a means of teaching them how to live as God’s people. Its purpose was to mitigate transgressions until the inheritor of Abraham’s promises (Christ) came. Now Paul makes a distinction between the covenant of God with Abraham and the acceptance of the law by the people of Israel through the agency of angels (Ac 7:53) and Moses. While Abraham entered into a full covenant with God, Israel ratified an existing legal code accepted by their representative head, Moses. Thus, the superiority of the promise over the law may be in view as well as an additional support to the assertion of 3:17 that the law could not negate the promise.
3:21–25. Paul places the law in a position secondary to the promise, awaiting its fulfillment through that promise, with the rhetorical question of 3:21. The grammar expects a negative answer. Paul places the law in right perspective as God’s thoroughly good gift. However, as Paul argued in Romans, the law was not able to give life and to defeat sin and death. Jesus’s faithful life and death and subsequent vindication by resurrection were necessary to deal with sin and death completely (3:22). Now that faith has come (3:23), the need and the appropriateness of the guardian’s task had ended (3:25). The guardian’s whole task was to point the way to faith in Christ (3:24; as in Rm 10:4, where the goal of the law is Christ).
D. The results of faith (3:26–29). 3:26. In the cultural and religious context of first-century Galatia, where distinctions of national origin, gender, and economic status were the defining tools for human interaction, Paul declares the inauguration of a new paradigm of human value. Paul switches back to the second-person plural from the first-person singular (3:15–25) to state his conclusion.
If the Galatians are being pressured to become something more than they believe they already are, they should note with care the fact that once they have been joined to Christ, all temporal distinctions become meaningless; all of them are already “sons of God” (3:26). The main emphasis of these statements is on the reality of kinship (or sonship) in the family of God as a result of faith in Christ.
3:27–29. Paul’s elaboration of this fact in the context of a first-century Gentile church being pressured by Judaizers would make a far greater impact than we may imagine. Paul specifies the accompanying full rights of this new intimate relationship, showing that Gentiles in Christ are also “heirs according to the promise” (3:29). In 3:28, Paul’s elaboration on the oneness found in Christ leaves no room for any prejudicial treatment of fellow believers in light of ethnicity, status, or gender. We should also note that the couplets Jew/Greek and slave/free are not exactly like male/female. While the two former couplets eradicate any distinction whatsoever, the latter one, linked by the conjunction “and,” indicates that while gender differences remain, such differences no longer represent any barrier to full participation in the newness of life found in Christ.
E. Maturing into sonship (4:1–7). Paul builds on the dual images of kinship and covenantal inheritance from the previous climactic section (3:26–29).
4:1–3. Just as the kinship of a child in a wealthy family is never in dispute (4:1), although that child must await the time of maturity to assume the control of the estate, so also the kinship of the Gentiles has never been in dispute. Though they were not God’s people until the coming of Christ, it was always God’s plan to include all of humankind under God’s grace. The use of the symbol of guardianship (4:2–3) appears to be applicable to both Jews and Greeks (notice the first-person plural in 4:3, 5). Prior to Christ, Paul asserts, everyone is assessed as having been under the “elements” (Gk stoicheia) of the world. Paul likely refers here to the negative spiritual forces, the so-called powers at work in the world.
4:4–7. Here Paul shows clearly the redeeming work of God in securing the available kinship for humanity. God “sent his Son” (4:4) and “sent [his] Spirit” (4:6). Thus, it is totally a work of God, with the result that each Galatian follower of Christ is “no longer a slave but a son” (4:7). As if to certify this fact of kinship as being received, Paul describes the Spirit as crying out through the heart of each redeemed person, “Abba” (4:6), which is the cry of a child to a loving father.
4. AN APPEAL TO THE GALATIANS (4:8–31)
A. An appeal to maturity (4:8–11). Appealing specifically to the Galatian Gentiles, Paul reminds them of their former enslavement to polytheism (4:8). Building on his earlier argument, Paul appeals to the fact that the Galatians have already received the Spirit and adoption into the family of God (4:5–6). Observing other religious rites as a means of gaining what they already have looks backward in time to when all were enslaved (4:9). But now that Christ has come, the elemental spirits, including death and sin, have been undone. The Galatians must live in light of Christ rather than pretending that his death and resurrection have not changed the old order. Referring to the fact that they have already begun to observe certain (presumably Jewish) regulations (4:10), Paul asserts that such actions threaten to negate all that he has done among them (4:11). Such actions suggest that they have made no progress since Paul’s visits. In their attempt to mature through legalism, the Galatians have actually indulged in a childish flirtation with danger.
B. An appeal to their personal relationship (4:12–20). The apostle next refers back to their first meeting, and his tone is more personal (4:12, 19). He calls on the Galatians to imitate him, based on the integrity of his former work among them (4:12). Because of some illness (4:13), which he does not pause to detail here (see 2 Co 12:7), Paul’s initial visit caused him to come under obligation to the Galatians. He recalls their former sympathetic response (4:15) to his needs and appeals to the strong personal relationship (4:14) to press them to reject those who would attempt to drive a wedge between them and their founder (4:17).
Paul applauds the Galatians for their concern to be zealous yet asks them to be careful to judge the worth of the object of their zeal (4:17–18). Referring to them as his “children” (4:19), Paul takes the loving tack of a parent. His wish is that his readers not only grow but also be capable of discerning what is appropriate for their growth (4:18). Paul states his goal as seeing Christ formed in them and voices his frustration with their current confusion (4:19–20).
C. An allegorical appeal (4:21–31). The allegory (4:24) in Paul’s final appeal stresses the main points of his previous arguments and thus stands as a good, if somewhat ironic, summation of the opponents’ errors.
4:21–25. Utilizing an incident revolving around Abraham, Paul shows that, like the covenants of law and grace, Hagar and Sarah can be compared yet have some very different characteristics. The major difference between the two is of kind, not circumstance. Paul appears to rely on the Galatians’ acquaintance with the historical narrative to point out the major factors in the story. Paul reverses the expectations of his opponents. Picking up on the slavery theme that has run through his letter (1:10; 2:4; 4:3, 8–9), Paul asserts that those people identified with Hagar, the slave, are those in Jerusalem, presumably apart from Christ and under the law, not yet set free from the powers of sin and death (4:23–25).
4:26–31. Those who are identified with the free woman, those “in Christ,” like the Galatians, are inheritors of the promises that the still enslaved do not possess (4:28). Thus, rather than being discontinuous with the promises of Abraham, the gospel of grace is fully aligned with those original promises. As if to further enhance the point, Paul recites a prophecy of Isaiah concerning Israel’s restoration from the captivity of Babylon (4:27; see Is 54:1). While the Israelites were few in number then (as the Gentile Christians are, relative to Jewish believers, at the time of writing), miraculous, God-ordained growth was promised.
5. FREEDOM IN CHRIST (5:1–6:10)
A. Thesis (5:1). Grammatically, 5:1 is related to the previous paragraph, yet it also provides both a summary and a transition point to the letter. The first sentence stands as the declaration of purpose for Christ’s redeeming work, emphasizing the decisive event, which changed the believer’s condition from one of slavery (under the law and/or other elemental principles; see 4:3, 9) to freedom (see 2:4; Jn 8:32–36; Rm 7:4, 6; 1 Co 9:1, 21; 11:29). The second part of the verse encourages the Galatians to hold to their position against those who would return them again to slavery. This encouragement will be given practical substance in 5:13–26. But Paul digresses for a moment, providing specific warnings against any Galatian hesitancy on this point (5:2–12).
B. Warnings and reproof (5:2–12). This digression serves to provide the last and most pointed set of warnings concerning the seriousness of the Galatians’ consideration of the opponents’ position.
5:2–4. Beginning with an emphatically personal appeal (5:2), Paul expands on the fact that the act of circumcision, rather than being a safeguard, actually serves to negate the power of Christ in their lives. The fact that Paul seems to restate this very same proposition in a slightly altered manner in 5:3–4 reminds us of his double curse against this teaching in 1:8–9. The call from Paul is for them to declare their allegiance. To attempt to be justified by the law is to ignore the grace they received in Christ and to forsake Christ himself (5:4).
5:5–6. If the Galatians are under the power of faith, then they join Paul (note the switch from “you” [plural] in 5:2–4 to “we” in 5:5) in awaiting the completion of the salvation begun in Christ.
In summing up the danger of circumcision, Paul makes a point that may be an overriding consideration in the minds of the opponents and wavering Gentiles: without circumcision, or without the legal requirements, does the Christ follower fall hopelessly into antinomianism (thus believing they are governed by no laws)? Paul assures them that the physical act of circumcision guarantees nothing as to the type of life one will lead. Rather, proper faith will express a person’s relationship to God through loving action (5:6). [The Sign of Circumcision]
5:7–10. An evident shift in tone takes place in 5:7, as if to signal Paul’s satisfaction that his argument should have the effect of restoring his “founder’s status” among his readers. He now contrasts his ministry and the one (“whoever” is singular in 5:10) or ones who have been hindering the Galatians. Certainly God, “the one who calls you” (5:8; see Rm 8:28, 30), is not the cause for their defection. Paul’s confidence that the Galatians will move forward again arises from his professed knowledge of their shared faith in Christ (5:10).
5:11. The final, somewhat inconsequential objection he addresses apparently came from those opponents who knew that Paul had appeared at times to allow circumcision for Gentiles. This may be a reference to his actions relative to Timothy (Ac 16:3). Paul makes it known that even his allowance of circumcision does not contradict his present position. His action toward Timothy, for example, was one of simple expediency (cf. 1 Co 9:19–23). The opponents, on the contrary, make circumcision a necessity for covenantal inclusion.
Paul also uses the proverb “A little leaven leavens the whole batch of dough” (Gl 5:9) in 1 Co 5:6. There he reminds the Corinthians that permitting even one person’s sin to go unchecked can affect the entire community. For the Galatians, the false teaching of even a single person can have the same tainting effect.
Paul ridicules the opponents’ charge that he preached circumcision. Why, then, would he be attacked so vigorously? Instead, he points to such a charge as a mere distraction from the opponents’ real conflict with him. He represents the “offense” of the cross (Gk skandalon, meaning “trap” or “snare”).
5:12. Paul’s rhetoric climaxes here as he states he wishes his opponents would not just circumcise (“cut around”) but castrate (“cut off”) themselves. While some commentators appear reluctant to believe Paul would utter such a condemnation, this act would actually be a better fate for these opponents than the one he calls for in Gl 1:8–9.
C. Proof of one’s grounding (5:13–26). Paul has now thoroughly analyzed the opponents’ position and has found it wanting. He has defended his position as an apostle and his rejection of the additional requirements of Jewish rites for Gentiles who come to God through faith in Christ. Yet one might ask, “What’s left? If you take away law, by what standard will a person live?”
5:13–15. In addressing this type of question, Paul reasserts his view of the purpose of redemption in Christ (see 5:1). This freedom does not induce license (indulging the sinful nature, 5:13), since it is not the absence of law but the goal of the law (5:14; see Jr 31:31–34). Paul shows that the proper expression of keeping the law comes from a heart full of grateful love and is shown through mutual service (5:13) and the love of neighbor (5:14).
This is an especially attractive and pointed picture of the results of true freedom, since it appears to be in complete contrast to the character of their congregational relationships at that time. Rather than guaranteeing righteousness, the inclusion of the law has only given vent to strife (5:15). Their way shows that they use the law inappropriately, since it promotes division instead of love.
5:16–18. As a counterbalance to the possibility of expressing one’s sinful nature or “flesh” (5:13) through freedom, Paul asserts that living “by the Spirit” (5:16) will characterize true freedom. Paul is emphatic: living by the Spirit will never result in fulfilling the flesh’s desires. Christian failure to obey is ultimately failure to live by the Spirit. The great emancipation for the Christ follower is to be “led by the Spirit” (5:18), a leading that takes away our subjugation to the law through the forces of darkness and to the sinful nature that they influence (see Rm 6:11–14). [Mortification]
5:19–21. The next two paragraphs (5:19–26) provide a practical contrast of attitudes and actions, which can be a personal test for the Galatians’ present orientation. By finding oneself on the list of either vices or virtues, one could also identify whether or not one was led by the Spirit. Fifteen acts of the flesh are specified (5:19–21), with the insistence that the list is not exhaustive (“and anything similar,” 5:21; see other lists in 1 Co 6:9–10; Eph 5:5; Rv 22:15). Some of the sins appear to relate directly to the pagan lifestyles the readers once practiced (5:20–21).
Paul asserts that it does not take great spiritual insight (“the works of the flesh are obvious,” 5:19) to spot the inappropriateness of these activities and attitudes among believers. In fact, he reminds them that he spoke to them about this before and told them that such acts revealed a person who would “not inherit the kingdom of God” (5:21).
5:22–23. In contrast to the multiple acts of the flesh, the singular “fruit” (5:22; likely denoting a harmonious unity) promotes a God-oriented expression of activities and attitudes. The nine attributes found here are clearly indicative of the Holy Spirit in the believer’s life and come as a composite whole, not as individual items that some have and others do not (for other lists of virtues, see 2 Co 6:6; Eph 4:2; 5:9; Col 3:12–15). Paul’s pronouncement that concludes the list (5:23) suggests that the work of the Spirit in one’s life provides an internal motivation; this properly orients a person to participate in the attitudes and actions that are consistent with the character of Christ and indeed consistent with the expectations of the law itself. Rather than being lawless, it fulfills the true intent of the law.
5:24–26. The final exhortations of the chapter indicate that while the reality of the fruit is a gift from the Spirit, the believer’s responsibility is to actively “live by the Spirit” (5:25). The follower of Jesus (and Paul includes himself here) does not sit idly by with the power of the Spirit within. We are instead called to active participation, in accordance with the new reality of our kinship. The final statement of the chapter (5:26) may introduce the next, more practical section of exhortations. In any case, Paul’s focus moves from theory (5:1, 13–25) to practice (5:26–6:10).
D. Practical ethics (6:1–10). It is not unusual for Paul to conclude his letters with a section on practical living that emphasizes some of the themes he addressed in the heart of the letter (see Rm 12:9–21; 1 Co 16:13–14; 2 Co 13:5). A pervasive problem for the gospel of grace was letting the attitude of hierarchy invade the Spirit-led life (cf. Rm 12:3–8; 1 Co 1:10–17; 2 Co 10:1–18, esp. v. 12).
6:1–5. In areas particularly open to the temptation of hierarchical appraisal (e.g., the awareness of another’s sin, 6:1, and the awareness of another’s burden, 6:2), Paul exhorts the Galatians to “live by the Spirit” (5:25). The Spirit-led individual will work toward restoration and unity.
Paul completes these exhortations with an appeal for each person to seriously assess their own condition, without falling into an attitude of conceit (6:3–4). The Galatians are to see that their faithful actions in this area do fulfill a law—namely, the law of Christ (6:2).
Following the Spirit (Gl 5:16–18) results in practical, concrete acts of love for other people, especially for fellow believers (Gl 6:1–10). Paul emphasizes the same lesson to the Corinthians when he places his description of love (1 Co 13) in the middle of his discussion on the gifts of the Spirit (1 Co 12–14).
6:6–10. In the area of financial responsibility, the Galatians are exhorted to share with those who taught them “the word” (6:6). This final section is provided in answer to the opponents’ objections that participation in Paul’s collection is unwise, giving a pretender the chance to defraud them (see 2 Co 11:8). Paul points to God’s judgment of the matter (6:7). Their participation is called for as a manifestation of the Spirit in their lives, an active “doing good” (6:9), which is especially appropriate when it benefits the “household of faith” (i.e., the Jerusalem church; 6:10).
6. CONCLUSION WITH PERSONAL APPEAL (6:11–18)
6:11. Confirming the belief that most of the letter was dictated is the notification that Paul writes the remainder of the letter. In drawing attention to the “large letters” with which he writes, Paul may give us the final clue as to why, upon his initial visit, the Galatians were willing to tear out their own eyes for him (4:15). The “thorn in the flesh” of 2 Co 12:7 and the ailment that plagued him in Galatia may well be attributed to some form of eye disease.
6:12–14. Paul takes the opportunity to personally emphasize the main point of his letter. The ones who trouble the Galatians are considered to be hypocritical opportunists, attempting to build their own misguided view of spirituality (6:13). The opponents’ motivation in all this is considered to be fear (6:12). In ridiculing his opponents’ motives, Paul sets forth his own motive. It is found in the pivotal experience of the “cross of our Lord Jesus Christ” (6:14). This event has the effect, for Paul, of causing the death of the world to him (referring to the world’s system, especially with regard to its values).
6:15–16. As if to leave them with one final, decisive word, Paul declares that the rite the opponents assert as being crucial becomes meaningless in relation to the gracious work of the Spirit in making a “new creation” (6:15; see 5:6; 2 Co 5:17). Peace and mercy are reserved only for those who “follow this standard” (6:16a). Only these people can be properly identified as “the Israel of God” (6:16b; see Rm 9:6; 11:7; Eph 3:6). Therefore, in Paul’s view, to be admitted as a member of the old covenant people of God, one must adhere to the provisions of the new covenant, which was promised as part of the old.
6:17–18. Paul’s last words alert us to the toll such battles have exacted from him. His authenticity is really not a matter of speculation; it should be a matter of evidence, the physical “marks” (Gk stigmata; literally a “brand mark” on an animal or slave) of a man scarred by a world that persecutes him as it did his Lord (6:17). Is there really any other, more convincing evidence they would need to see (see 2 Co 11:22–30)?
The benediction (6:18) is characteristic of Paul, though unusually short (see Rm 16:25–27). Particularly poignant for this epistle is the inclusion of the title “brothers and sisters.” He sends off the letter with a prayer that such a designation might still be appropriate. [Paul the Letter Writer]