Introduction

A. AUTHORSHIP

There is no fact of New Testament studies more widely attested than the Pauline authorship of Galatians. The few who have rejected its genuineness have denied the existence of any first-century Christian literature and even of a first-century Apostle Paul. In contrast, this letter has been accepted by the most liberal critics as a norm for first-century authenticity.¹ Thus, “the letter to the Galatians was written, as it claims to have been, by Paul, the Christian apostle of the first century.”²

B. DATE

No evidence is available which determines with certainty when and where Paul wrote this Epistle. However, there are some references in the letter that assist in fixing the date within certain broad limits.³ The account of the Jerusalem Council (2:1-10; cf. Acts 15) and the subsequent conflict with Peter at Antioch (11-18) determine the earliest possible date to be during Paul's stay at Antioch, between his first and second missionary journeys—approximately A.D. 48-50. The suggestion of two visits to Galatia before the letter was written⁴ would make it necessary for Paul to have written it after his Galatian stop on the second missionary tour⁵ (Acts 16:1-5). This stop would have been either after arriving at Corinth or when he returned to Antioch, before his third journey (Acts 18:23). Such a date would be approximately A.D. 50-51.

Another possibility is that Paul wrote the Epistle on his third missionary journey, during this extended stay at Ephesus (Acts 19:1-20), or even later while in Macedonia or Corinth (Acts 20:1-2). This would place the date about A.D. 54 or 55.

The similarity of content in Galatians and Romans has produced the suggestion that they were written at approximately the same time,⁶ which would place the date at approximately A.D. 56.⁷

An argument against such a late date is the suddenness of the Galatian apostasy,⁸ and also the fact that the controversy with the Judaizers had subsided by this time—thus making the issues in Galatians out-of-date.

It appears that the Galatian letter was written shortly after Paul's final visit, probably from Ephesus, approximately A.D. 54 or 55.

C. DESTINATION

The destination of this Epistle appears to be clearly defined, namely, “unto the churches of Galatia” (1:2). But such a conclusion quickly vanishes when it is realized that the term “Galatia” was used in two different ways in Paul's day. In common usage it referred to a relatively small region in northeastern Asia Minor, comparable to Lycaonia, Pisidia, and Phrygia. The official Roman use of the term designated a large province (see map 1) including adjacent portions of the above-named regions.

The migratory movements of the Celtic⁹ tribes make up a large part of the pre-Christian history of southern Europe. After a hit-and-run raid in the fourth century B.C., which climaxed with the sacking of Rome, these restless people invaded Greece in the third century B.C., with more permanent objectives. When they were repulsed at Delphi in 279 B.C., the remnants of the defeated army joined a large group of their kinsmen who had not taken part in the invasion and overran Asia Minor. They were gradually repulsed by the native Asians and by the last half of the century were confined to a small area in the interior.¹⁰ Early in the second century B.C. these Celts were conquered by the legions of Rome, but for over 150 years were allowed to govern themselves as a “dependent kingdom.”¹¹ In 25 B.C. this relatively small territory was made a part of a larger Roman province that was given the same name.¹² However the Roman official title was in great part ignored by the populace, and the term “Galatia” was used with reference to the northern territory of the Celts.¹³

Where were the churches to whom this letter was addressed? If they were located in the northern territory dominated by the Celtic migrants, when were these churches founded?¹⁴ There is a clear record of Paul founding churches in the cities of Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch during his first missionary journey (Acts 13:13-14; 14:16, 21-24). These are all located in the Roman province of Galatia, but not in the northern territory of the Celtic migrants. At the beginning of his second journey Paul returned to these cities “confirming the churches” (cf. Acts 15:41—16:5). Luke adds that the missionary party “went through the Phrygian and Galatian country” (Acts 16:6, lit.). It has been argued that this is not a summary reference to the verses that precede it, but indicates that Paul journeyed to the north and established churches among the Celtic migrants. During Paul's third missionary journey Luke observes that the missionary party passed “through in order the Galatian country and Phrygia¹⁵ confirming the disciples” (Acts 18:23, lit.), which can be understood as a return visit to the Celts.

It is not possible to determine with certainty where the Galatian churches were located. However, the fact that Paul consistently used the proper Roman political divisions,¹⁶ coupled with the known existence of churches in the southern area of the Roman province, would suggest that these known churches in the south were those to whom Paul wrote. At best, the argument for the “North Galatia Theory” is based on supposition and conjecture.¹⁷ The all-important fact is that the question does not have any fundamental bearing on the interpretation of the Epistle.

D. PURPOSE

For centuries the only bulwark against the tide of pagan libertinism was Jewish legalism. Through the law, which had been received by special revelation, these devout people secured a degree of justification with God. Even among the early Jewish Christians the acceptance of Christ was in no sense considered an alternative or substitute for their holy law (cf. Acts 21:20). When the gospel of Christ was preached to the Gentiles the question quite naturally arose as to the necessity of the law. The Apostle to the Gentiles, inspired by a new revelation, proclaimed that salvation was through grace by faith—without the law! Such a message aroused the strong opposition of many who were convinced that a man could be justified only through keeping the law and who feared that to disregard it would be throwing the door open to pagan practices.

The controversy climaxed in the Jerusalem Council.¹⁸ Following Paul's successful evangelization of the heathen province of Galatia the exponents of the law arrived, insisting that there could be no salvation without it. The apostle violently rejected this conclusion, and in this letter forcibly states his case.

Paul's argument is that a man is justified by grace through faith, on the basis of promise and not law. Further, this salvation by grace through faith brings freedom, which includes freedom from the law! To remain under the law not only was to fall short of God's grace, but would actually result in slavery or bondage. The law had fulfilled its temporary function and had now been abrogated. Freedom from sin was inseparable from freedom from the law. Some objected that this would allow and even encourage sin. Paul points out that the Spirit is also received by grace through faith, and His presence provides an adequate moral imperative against evil, which is sadly lacking in the law. However, Paul emphasizes that the believer must live under the discipline of the Spirit, not abusing his freedom, and finding the positive expression of his faith through love.

E. THEOLOGY

Paul has often been portrayed as teaching that justification is by faith alone. Actually the concept alone is a later theological addition. Paul argues that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law. However, having been justified by faith, the believer is to fulfill the just requirements of the law, through love.

The logical implication of justification by faith alone is antinomianism, against which Paul vehemently objected with “God forbid.” His repeated warning that wrong living excluded men from God's kingdom should leave no doubt as to his attitude (cf. comments on 5:19-21). Paul was greatly concerned for his converts to realize that their new faith provided the only adequate means for ethical conduct, rather than absolving them of that responsibility.

There is a distinction in Paul's thought that it is essential to recognize. It can be described as the contrast of the indicative and imperative. In the Greek of the New Testament it is graphically seen in the use of differing moods. The indicative mood depicts a simple assertion, in past, present, or future time— “this is, was or shall be.” The imperative mood depicts a commanding assertion—“this must be.” Thus Paul not only indicates what was already the experience of the Galatians, but also what he was exhorting them to experience. By distinguishing his exhortations from his observations an important insight can be found into the apostle's thought.

It is important to remember that Galatians is not a systematic treatise with the material organized in a logical form or scheme. Instead, it is an impassioned letter that is filled with deep emotion. For instance, in the midst of Paul's reference to his conflict with Peter—which he is using as evidence of the divine authority of his message—he quite naturally goes on to give witness to his personal faith (2:11-21). He also pauses to appeal and admonish his “children” in the midst of a strong argument (4:12-20; 5:1).

Although the followers of Christ today are not besieged by the exponents of Jewish legalism, the basic emphasis of Paul is strikingly fitting. How often—and in how many different forms—has come the suggestion and even insistence that a Christian must have the protection of a legalistic cloak! Paul's warning that such legalism can result only in bondage and that the discipline of the Spirit alone can produce spiritual fruit needs to be heard again today.

F. PROCEDURE

At the beginning of each section a brief synopsis is given so that the paragraph can be viewed in its entirety. An attempt has been made to deal with the technical and critical questions in the footnotes. Unless a specific notation is made, the lexical authority for the comments made on the Greek text is taken from Arndt and Gingrich.¹⁹