OVERVIEW
This second section of the book of Galatians forms, in rhetorical terms, the exhortatio, that portion of the letter where the author or speaker exhorts the audience to action on the basis of all that has come before. It is in this portion of Galatians that Paul will speak to practical issues that surround the Galatians’ implementation of their Judaizing tendencies (speaking against that form of legalism, 4:12–5:12) and to the issue of a proper lifestyle issuing from the gospel (against libertinism, 5:13–6:10). He will do so with both imperatives (commands; the first one at 4:12, and then in 4:27, 30; 5:1 [twice], 13, 14, 16; 6:1, 2, 6, 7) and hortatory subjunctives (expressing his strong desire that they do or not do certain things; cf. 5:25, 26; 6:9, 10). These grammatical features demand that we understand the letter body of Galatians to be divided into two major sections, as I have divided it here (Apostolic Admonition, 1:6–4:11; Apostolic Appeal, 4:12–6:10). Throughout this second part of the letter, Paul pleads with his beloved Galatians to appropriate freedom in Christ and to live righteous lives according to the truths of his gospel. Given the rightness or truthfulness of his preceding argumentation in the propositio and probatio of Galatians, Paul could expect his readers to act on what they learned there. Thus he exhorts them to implement these truths into their lives.
OVERVIEW
Paul addresses first the implications of the Galatians’ Judaizing tendencies as this is perceived as the greater threat to their faith. Following closely on his detailing of the Galatians’ release from “slavery under the basic principles of the world” (v.3) and his expression of anguished concern for them soteriologically (v.11), he now appeals to them to avoid the pitfalls of legalism in the expression of their faith. His appeal will be fashioned on the basis of his own experience with them, by means of a scripturally based allegory of bondage and freedom, and with a plea for them to live in freedom in Christ.
OVERVIEW
These verses have often been understood to be a passionate digression or an erratic emotional outburst by Paul interrupting the flow of his argument (cf. Burton, 236–37; Betz, 220–21; Matera, 162–63). Analysis of this section within the structure of Galatians is therefore often held to be extremely difficult, accomplished perhaps only by means of exegetically informed intuition, if indeed not altogether impossible to achieve.
It is clear that this is an emotionally charged section, and Paul makes allusive references here that are not entirely open to our investigation. But understanding these verses as the beginning of the exhortation portion of the letter allows us to see that Paul is pleading with his Galatian converts to remember their shared experiences as a way to incorporate correctly into life the implications of their faith.
12I plead with you, brothers, become like me, for I became like you. You have done me no wrong. 13As you know, it was because of an illness that I first preached the gospel to you. 14Even though my illness was a trial to you, you did not treat me with contempt or scorn. Instead, you welcomed me as if I were an angel of God, as if I were Christ Jesus himself. 15What has happened to all your joy? I can testify that, if you could have done so, you would have torn out your eyes and given them to me. 16Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth?
COMMENTARY
12 Paul begins his appeal with the imperative, “Become like me.” At first glance this exhortation may seem a bit confusing or perhaps egocentric. But taken in the context of all that has come before, it may be understood as Paul’s desire that the Galatians maintain allegiance to the truth of the gospel (as Paul has expounded in 1:11–2:14) and avoid subscribing to the Judaizers’ message of law observance (as he has developed in 2:15–4:11). He is therefore, as neatly expressed by Longenecker, 189, entreating the Galatians to emulate him by remaining loyal to the truth of the gospel (2:5, 14), by being dead to and not under the law (2:19; 3:25), and by living out their faith in Christ (2:20; 3:26–29) and thereby not nullifying the grace of God (2:21) but enjoying all the benefits of the gospel by means of faith in Christ (3:6–4:7).
This plea is based on the expressed fact that Paul had become like them. Presumably, Paul has in mind here his conduct among them in his first contact with and preaching of the gospel to them. He brings to their collective mind by means of this mnemonic shorthand the recollection of his character while among them, his willingness to sacrifice for them, and his gentleness in teaching them as he publicly portrayed Jesus Christ as crucified (3:1; cf. 1Co 9:19–23; 1Th 2:5–8). He will also speak to the issue of their gracious response to both himself and the gospel (4:13–14). The basis for this appeal, then, is their earlier shared experience, the reciprocally loving dynamic that Paul would have them carry over into their present conduct and relationship with him.
Paul closes this first imperative with the added notation that the Galatians had “done [him] no wrong.” This statement may be driven by the fact that Paul fears that the Galatians somehow think of him differently from the way they did in the past (v.16) or out of their concern that Paul believes they are harming themselves in their Judaizing tendencies. Thus he assures them that his appeal is not based on some perceived personal grievance or failure with regard to Paul on the part of the Galatians but arises out of his genuine care and concern for them (cf. v.11). This gentle assurance to the Galatians protects their integrity, as Paul assumes that having heard the truth, they will respond correctly to it.
13–14 Paul follows up this assurance to his converts with the reminder of their treatment of him while he was with them at that earlier time. He recalls that he was with them due to an unspecified “weakness of the flesh” (astheneian tēs sarkos), an “illness,” on that first occasion.
While many have speculated on the nature of this illness, positing sicknesses ranging from malaria (William Ramsay, St Paul the Traveler and Roman Citizen [London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1920], 94–97) to epilepsy (William Wrede, Paul [London: Green, 1907], 22–23) to ophthalmia (numerous commentators, based on 4:15), the exact nature of Paul’s illness is undisclosed. Whatever the case, this illness caused Paul to alter his plans and became the occasion for his preaching the gospel to the Galatians. The Galatians could have rejected Paul and his message on the basis of his illness, out of general superstition (cf. Ac 28:3–6), or as a result of perceiving his illness as issuing from demonic activity (cf. 2Co 12:7). His sickness was indeed in some manner a “trial” for them, yet in spite of that, the Galatians treated Paul with high regard and his message as the truth of God, as though he were “an angel” or even as Jesus Christ himself bringing the gospel message to them. This demonstration of affection toward Paul at a time when the Galatians might have otherwise understandably rejected him and his message makes all the more perplexing for him their treatment of him now, as they are apparently resisting Paul and his message and following the Judaizing influence among them.
15 Paul’s experience of their resistance is why he now questions them with regard to their previous behavior toward him. The Galatians had responded with “joy” to Paul and to the gospel he proclaimed. He asks rhetorically what has happened in their lives to produce this present state of affairs between them—what has replaced their joyous relationship with one of tension and discord (cf. 3:1–5). The expression of their prior commitment and generosity toward him (“you would have torn out your eyes and given them to me,” probably a figure of speech indicating willingness to go to extreme lengths to accommodate the needs of another) indicates just how far they had come. Whereas before they would have done almost anything joyfully to respond with favor to Paul and his message and so to meet his needs, they now have lost that willingness, that state of blessedness. Paul’s rhetorical question here is a means of expressing his incredulity at this movement on the part of the Galatians, suggesting that it is they, and not he, who have moved in their relationship.
16 Thus Paul finally articulates what has been in the background all along in these verses: the reason the Galatians have lost their joy, the reason they have moved in their relationship to Paul, is because he is “telling [them] the truth” with regard to the gospel and the perversion of the gospel that is the message of the Judaizers. Rather than treating Paul with the affection and willingness to hear him they had shown in their first encounter, he has now “become [their] enemy” by calling them to return to the truth. His reminiscence of their earlier shared experiences becomes the basis for his continued appeal to them, as he shares with them his present burden for them with respect to the Judaizers and their designs on the Galatians.
17Those people are zealous to win you over, but for no good. What they want is to alienate you from us, so that you may be zealous for them. 18It is fine to be zealous, provided the purpose is good, and to be so always and not just when I am with you. 19My dear children, for whom I am again in the pains of childbirth until Christ is formed in you, 20how I wish I could be with you now and change my tone, because I am perplexed about you!
COMMENTARY
17 Paul’s rehearsal of personal memories of his time with the Galatians is interrupted here as he expresses indignation over the situation reflected in v.16. He has become the Galatians’ “enemy” only because of the proselytizing work of the Judaizers (“win you over”). Paul does not name those involved, but all parties are aware of who his opponents are and their work to undermine his gospel by replacing it with “a different gospel—which is really no gospel at all” (1:6–7). In contrast to Paul’s own conduct among the Galatians, as reflected in his immediately prior recollection (“I became like you”; “an angel of God”; Christ Jesus himself,” 4:13–15), these Judaizers seek to “alienate” the Galatians from Paul and his gospel by a personal attack against him, thus causing the Galatians to “be zealous” for them. The term “be zealous” (zēloō, GK 2420) was used in relational contexts of men courting women or of affection between teachers and students (Plutarch, Mor. 448E; cf. Lightfoot, 176–78). Thus the Judaizers are attempting to alienate the affections of the Galatians so that the Galatians reject all relationship with Paul and his message of the gospel, thereby shunning him. And the Judaizers do so, Paul insists, only for the purpose of causing the Galatians to follow after themselves (cf. 6:12–13, where Paul will address the Judaizers’ motivations more fully). This, Paul warns, they do “for no good.”
18 Here Paul employs an ancient aphorism to bolster his argument (cf. Longenecker, 194): It is always good to be courted when the purpose for that courtship can be considered to be good. That is true when Paul is with the Galatians, or even when others court them in his absence. But Paul does not understand the Judaizers’ courtship of the Galatians to be good, of course (“for no good”), and that is precisely his point. His appeal to the Galatians by means of this maxim is that they should consider his warning of the previous verse and recognize the insidious personal motivations of their suitors. Unlike Paul (cf. vv.13–15), the Judaizers are not wooing the Galatians in the best interest of the Galatians; rather, they are zealous for them for their own self-interest, so as to conform the Galatians to their own “gospel” at the expense of the truth.
19 Prompted by the “when I am with you” of v.18, Paul returns to the gentle language of the earlier verses in this section as he again addresses his converts personally. His language here betrays deep affection and concern for the Galatians, as well as his own perplexity at their conduct. “My dear children” (tekna mou) is a warm term of endearment, used here again to remind the Galatians of their previous relationship to Paul and his present care for them. That care and concern is expressed in the intimate terminology of childbirth. This is unusual imagery for Paul, who elsewhere speaks of parents caring for children (1Th 2:7, 11) or of a father begetting children (1Co 4:15); but as Burton, 249, suggests, Paul is driven to this extreme by the Galatians “reactionary step” of adhering to the Judaizers’ message, which “forces on the apostle the painful repetition of that process by which he first brought them into the world of faith in Christ.” Paul must continue to bear that “birthing” pain until the Galatians respond correctly to his warnings and reject the message of the Judaizers.
20 Paul now expresses again his desire to “be with” the Galatians (cf. v.18). Letters communicate “presence,” but they are often a poor substitute for face-to-face dialogue, particularly in light of such highly charged polemics and the potentially serious consequences of the Galatians’ rejection of the truth of the gospel for the message of the Judaizers. Paul would prefer to speak directly to the Galatians about these matters, to “change [his] tone” with them. This expression may refer to his desire to change the way he expresses himself in these verses (so NIV) or to his wanting to change the content of what he has said (so JB). It has also been suggested that these words indicate Paul’s desire to exchange the letter with his personal presence (Longenecker, 196). In any case, the point is clear: Paul would prefer not to have to speak to the Galatians in this manner and about this issue. His desire would be that the Galatians not give ear to the siren call of another gospel but that they remain true to the word of truth he had proclaimed to them at the first, and which they had embraced. Thus, he is “perplexed” at their departure from the truth (1:6), as he expresses his present experience of concern for them.
OVERVIEW
Paul moves in his argumentation to continue his appeal to the Galatians by means of an allegory, employed to demonstrate the superiority of freedom via faith in Christ to the slavery that is represented by the message of the Judaizers. Most commentators consider Paul’s writing here to be a final scriptural argument for his position (so, e.g., Burton, 251; Bruce, 214–16). But if we understand this section on the basis of epistolary and rhetorical considerations to be part of his apostolic appeal to his converts, Paul here furthers his purpose of bringing the Galatians to understand that moving back into a nomistic relational dynamic with God is “not good” (4:18). Based on the discussion of 3:1–4:11, which supports his proposition expressed at 2:15–21 that faith in Christ is the only way rightly to relate to God, Paul’s appeal, growing out of their shared experience, has been to the Galatians not to follow after the false gospel of the Judaizers (4:12–20). Now he will expand on that appeal by means of this scripturally based illustration of his larger point. Thus these verses do indeed bolster his message, but not, per se, as a climactic exegetically developed support for his position. Rather, the section becomes a logical solicitation to the Galatians to recognize the futility of following after the Judaizers. Paul’s argumentation here is complex and reflects the polemical situation between himself and his opponents, who undoubtedly also used Abraham, Sarah, and elements of the Sinai/Hagar/ Jerusalem argument against Paul and his gospel, positing Paul’s message as “undeveloped” truth and their own as “fully developed” truth (see Longenecker, 199–206). But the main lines of his argumentation are clear enough, and serve to call the Galatians to repudiate the message of the Judaizers and so to claim the freedom that belongs to them in Christ.
21Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says? 22For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. 23His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way; but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise.
24These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. 25Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. 26But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother. 27For it is written:
“Be glad, O barren woman,
who bears no children;
break forth and cry aloud,
you who have no labor pains;
because more are the children of the desolate woman
than of her who has a husband.”
28Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. 29At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. 30But what does the Scripture say? “Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman’s son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman’s son.” 31Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman.
21 Paul challenges those who want to “be under the law” to consider carefully what the law actually says. Addressing the Galatians as a unified whole (as at 3:1), his wording suggests that the believers have not fully “bought in” to the Judaizers’ message at this point (cf. 1:7; 4:17), but have begun to observe some practices, such as Jewish feasts or celebrations (cf. 4:10). His concern is to prevent them from going further in observation of the Jewish law (cf. 3:3).
“Are you not aware of what the law says?” is literally “Do you not hear [ouk akouete] the law?” This reflects the common practice within Judaism and the early church of reading Scripture aloud, so that all could come under its hearing (cf. Ac 15:21), with the goal of internalizing and acting on what was heard. Phrasing Paul’s challenge in this way calls on the Galatians to take seriously the responsibility for the full implications of the law they believe they want to embrace.
22 “It is written” is typical phraseology for quotations of the Hebrew Scriptures. But here Paul does not directly quote the OT so much as he uses the formula to call to mind the several chapters of Genesis that contain the story of Abraham and Sarah. Paul is here responding to the purportedly scripturally based arguments of the Judaizers, as he does not quote a specific text but rather generally “allows the genuine Old Testament foundation of the Judaizers’ argument. . . . The story is already before the Galatians; they will know that the slave is Hagar, the free woman Sarah” (C. K. Barrett, “The Allegory of Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar in the Argument of Galatians,” in Rechtfertigung, ed. J. Friedrich et al. [Tübingen: Mohr, 1976], 9–10). Thus, Paul will meet the argument of his opponents on its own terms and demonstrate the validity of his gospel message by showing the invalidity of the message of the Judaizers.
23 The validity of Paul’s argument is now underscored. The contrast between the son “by the slave woman” and the son “by the free woman” is that the birth of the slave woman’s son results from natural procreation, from “ordinary” means. The son of the free woman, however, is the result of the extraordinary, of God’s specific direct intervention according to his promise. The implication of this statement is, for Paul, that it is faith in Christ that lines up with God’s promise to Abraham, as Paul has already argued (3:15–29), and that the son of promise represents those who rely on God’s promise in Christ through faith for redemption. The slave woman’s son, then, will represent something else entirely.
24 Paul summarizes expressly here what he has intended by this imagery all along: the women, Sarah and Hagar, represent two covenants in an allegory (allēgoroumena, GK 251; NIV, “figuratively”). Allegorical interpretation has a long and often unfortunate history in ancient Judaism and in the church, and attempts have been made to tie Paul to the excesses of his contemporaries, such as the Alexandrian Jew Philo (cf. Bruce, 215). But Paul is not attempting here to reduce the scriptural and historical content to moral aphorism or philosophical truism, as is the case with most allegory (and thus attempts to suggest that Paul indicates here that the Genesis narrative itself is allegorical must be rejected). He is simply using the similar situation that exists between the promise and law to make his point, as represented respectively by Sarah and Hagar, on the one hand, and the freedom in Christ as opposed to the legalism of the Judaizers on the other. He is responding in kind to the form of interpretation being put forth by the Judaizers so as to counter their arguments that their teaching and message of the “gospel” accurately represents God’s movement in redemptive history, while Paul’s interpretation of the significance of the person and work of Christ does not. In other words, the OT proof texts apparently being used by the Judaizers to support their interpretation of Scripture are being taken up and used by Paul to refute their claims and demonstrate his case (cf. Barrett, 6), thus turning their own arguments against them by correcting their exegesis. Thus, Paul uses the Scripture in this way of necessity, albeit in a Palestinian rather than Alexandrian fashion (cf. R. P. C. Hanson, Allegory and Event [Richmond, Va.: John Knox, 1959], 82–83), to answer what was undoubtedly a reasonably presented case by his opponents to the Galatians.
“The women,” Paul says, “represent two covenants.” The two covenants are the Old, which is Torah-centered, represented by Hagar, and is the one the Judaizers would have the Galatians continue. The New, though not developed here by Paul but certainly implied by contrast, is represented by Sarah (promise), is Christ-centered, and is that which Paul proclaims. And, Paul adds, Hagar represents slavery, a slavery Paul has continually warned against and from which he would save the Galatian believers.
25 Paul associates Hagar and Mount Sinai here. This is difficult, as manuscript and patristic evidence is divided as to whether or not the word “Hagar” is to be found in the text at all (note the textual apparatus in the UBS4), but it would be hard to explain why Paul would insert an otherwise arcane bit of geographical information into a polemical argument if “Hagar” were not in the original. It is best to take the text of Paul’s letter as having contained the word here.
The question then becomes what Paul intends by associating Hagar with Mount Sinai in this way. Many have interpreted Paul’s meaning here from the fact that “Hagar” sounds similar to an Arabic word meaning “rock” or “mountain.” Paul would then be exploiting this similarity in a kind of free association to tie Hagar to the giving of the law (cf. Burton, 260). Others ascribe Paul’s meaning here to his willingness to play rather loosely with the text to make his point (cf. Betz, 245). It is more fruitful, however, to understand that Paul associates Hagar with the giving of the Mosaic legislation at Mount Sinai by God to Israel, precisely because the Judaizers argued in this fashion and he chooses to use their analogy again to refute their claims. This association then serves to illustrate his previously having tied Hagar to slavery and the nomistic practices of the Judaizers, who are identified now as the “present city of Jerusalem,” the center of Judaism and Jewish practices, and the Judaizers’ argument that such practices must continue as a proper expression of Christianity.
26 The association of Hagar with slavery, Mount Sinai, and the law is now contrasted with “the Jerusalem that is above,” which is “free,” and “our mother.” The idea of a heavenly Jerusalem is widespread within Judaism, both biblical and extrabiblical (cf. Ps 87:3; Isa 54:1, which Paul will quote at 4:27; Eze 40–48; Sir 36:13ff; Tob 13; 1 En. 53:6; 90:28–29; Heb 11:10, 14–16; 12:22; 13:14; Rev 3:12; 21:2). Paul uses this understanding to further his illustration of freedom in Christ and expands on it by contrasting Hagar to Sarah, “our mother.” The children of Sarah, the children of promise, are “free,” not in bondage. The Galatians must choose with which “mother” to be associated.
27 Sarah, the barren and scorned wife of the prophet Abraham (cf. Ge 16:4–5), ultimately had her fortunes reversed by God’s granting her a son in fulfillment of his promise to Abraham. Now in Paul’s imagery Sarah figuratively becomes the spiritual mother of all those who believe after the fashion of Abraham, the prototypical believer and father of whose faith replicates his own (cf. 3:15–29). Just as Abraham and Sarah rejoiced at the birth of “Laughter” (Isaac; cf. Ge 21:1–7), the promise of God to Abraham that in his seed all nations would be blessed now comes to fruition in and through the Lord Jesus and those who believe in his person, word, and work. Paul quotes the prophet Isaiah to underscore his point, as the prophet, rightly interpreted, foretold that such would be the case.
28 Giving biblical support to the illustration of the case in point, Paul addresses the Galatians directly. He encourages the Galatians to follow his teaching by giving them the benefit of the doubt, suggesting that they think of themselves as Sarah’s children, children of promise, as was Isaac. Thus there is no need to adopt a Jewish nomistic lifestyle; they are free and not to be associated with Hagar, Mount Sinai, and the law. Despite the Judaizers’ claims to the contrary, believers in Christ are children of the heavenly Jerusalem through God’s promise to Abraham. The Galatians who follow Paul’s teaching and embrace freedom in Christ and reject the Judaizers’ gospel are indeed children of promise.
29 This conclusion is followed by confirmation out of the Galatians’ own experience. Just as Ishmael, the slave son “born in the ordinary way,” persecuted Isaac, the son of promise, so now the Judaizers persecute the Galatians, who are sons of promise, those born of the Spirit. Paul would have the Galatians understand that the presence of those who would confuse and harass them by distorting the message of the gospel and so rob them of their freedom in Christ (cf. 1:7; 3:1–5) is nothing new in God’s redemptive program. It has always been the case that the “son of the slave woman” would resent the son of promise and treat him accordingly (cf., e.g., Ge 21:8–9; 27–28).
But Paul’s argument is also subtly shifting in this verse, as he contrasts the son born kata sarka (“according to the flesh”; NIV, “in the ordinary way”) with the son born “by the power of the Spirit.” In v.23 Paul had referred to the sons born “by the slave woman” and “by the free woman.” Using terminology here (kata pneuma, “by the power of the Spirit”) evocative of his language there (kata sarka . . . di’ epangelias, “according to the flesh . . . through a promise”), Paul emphasizes again that there are two kinds of people represented by these two sons: the children of the slave woman, who live their lives based on legal ordinances and associated practices, and the children of the free woman, who live by the direction of God’s Spirit. Paul had spoken earlier of the Spirit (3:2–5, 14), the gospel (1:7–9, 11; 2:2, 5, 7, 14; 3:8), and blessing (3:8, 9, 14). But his later discussion is dominated by the notions of promise (3:16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 29; 4:28) and inheritance (3:18; 4:1–7, 21, 31). His movement here to discussion of the Spirit, in language approximating the statements “as the result of a promise” (4:23) and “children of promise” (v.28) signals a transition from his concern to articulate the reasons for exhorting the Galatians to reject the Judaizers’ position to the practical implications of their embracing the person, word, and work of Jesus Christ. Longenecker, 216–17, notes, “References to the Spirit [will be] dominant thereafter. . . . In effect, then, all of Paul’s previous references to the gospel, the Spirit, the promise, the blessings, and the inheritance become focused here and throughout the rest of the letter in terms of the Spirit’s presence and guidance in a believer’s life.”
30–31 Quoting again from the Abraham/Sarah/Isaac/Hagar/Ishmael narrative, Paul exhorts the Galatians to “get rid of the slave woman and her son.” This is his conclusion to the preceding argument: the Judaizers’ understanding of Scripture and the promise to Abraham, extending as it does the Abrahamic covenant through the filter of the Mosaic, results in bondage to nomistic observances that do not issue in one receiving the blessing or participating in the promise. They do not make one righteous before God and so do not issue in salvation (cf. 3:1–14). Thus, the Judaizers are the ones who must be cast out and their message rejected. It is the children of the “free woman,” those identified by Paul as the ones who believe in Jesus Christ and not law observance as the means to being in right relationship with God, who inherit the promise.
NOTES
21–31 Paul’s use of allegory in this section has been called a result of “excited feeling” (so Burton, 252); “out of place” or “repetitive” (so Luther); or as demonstrating that Paul believes that Jewish believers in Jesus should continue as Jews, while Gentiles who believe should remain Gentiles (so J. C. O’Neill, “‘For This Hagar Is Mount Sinai in Arabia’ [Galatians 4:25],” in The Old Testament in the New Testament, ed. Steve Moyise [Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000], 210–19). It is clear, however, that Paul intends by means of this allegory to call the Galatians to be true children of Abraham, free from bondage, as was Isaac the son of promise. The interpretation of the allegory, then, is fairly straightforward.
24 Paul’s meaning and intention in his use of allegory is much disputed; indeed, some have shied away from the use of the term “allegory” here altogether. But that is what Paul calls it, and numerous examples of allegorical argumentation among rabbis trained in the Palestinian tradition of Paul’s day exist. For more information, see R. P. C. Hanson, Allegory and Event; Richard N. Longenecker, Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period (2nd ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999); J. Z. Lauterbach, “Ancient Jewish Allegorists,” JQR 1 (1911): 291–333, 503–31; and Richard M. Davidson, Typology in Scripture (Berrien Springs, Mich.: Andrews Univ. Press, 1981).
OVERVIEW
In this final section of his appeal against the Galatians’ legalistic tendencies, Paul will finalize his argument in support of faith as over against law observance. These verses get to the heart of Paul’s concern for his converts and sum up all that he has written to them thus far about the Judaizing controversy. But this section also draws the argument against the Judaizers to a neat conclusion. In these verses Paul mirrors statements made at the letter’s beginning as to his reason for admonishing the Galatians, thus framing in these two sections all that he has said in the body of the letter about the Judaizing threat to the Galatian churches (the term for this type of literary association is inclusio).
That Paul has framed his argument in this way is demonstrated by noting the forbidding tone of 5:1–12, which parallels the gravity of 1:6–10. As well, language that occurs in 1:6–10 is reflected in 5:1–12: “deserting the one who called you” (1:6) is echoed at 5:8, “that kind of persuasion does not come from the one who calls you.” The expressions “alienated from Christ” and “fallen away from grace” of 5:4 resonate with “the grace of Christ” of 1:6. The adverb palin (“again”) is used at both 1:9 and 5:3 to set up supporting statements. And the anathema of 1:8 and 9 (“let him be eternally condemned”) is paralleled at 5:10 by the threat of God’s judgment (“the one who is throwing you into confusion will pay the penalty”) and the sarcasm of 5:12 (“I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!”). Thus the presentation of Paul’s argument against the Judaizers begins and ends with similar conceptuality, expressed in language that articulates the acute nature of the apostle’s burden that the Galatians reject the notion of law observance as a means to righteousness (see Longenecker, 221–22).
The section divides into two parts: 5:1–6 discusses Christian freedom as opposed to law observance, and 5:7–12 consists of a collection of pointed remarks and rhetorical questions designed to give the Galatians further pause regarding the motivations of the Judaizers and their teaching (cf. Betz, 264).
1It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.
2Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. 3Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. 4You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. 5But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope. 6For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.
7You were running a good race. Who cut in on you and kept you from obeying the truth? 8That kind of persuasion does not come from the one who calls you. 9“A little yeast works through the batch of dough.” 10I am confident in the Lord that you will take no other view. The one who is throwing you into confusion will pay the penalty, whoever he may be. 11Brothers, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been abolished. 12As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!
COMMENTARY
1 Paul calls on the Galatians to act on the freedom they have in Christ. He appeals to them not to allow themselves to be persuaded to take up “again” the yoke of slavery. Whereas in their recent past they had been enslaved to “those who by nature are not gods” (4:8–9), in this instance Paul has in mind slavery to the Judaizers’ interpretation of the law (cf. 3:23). The verse begins grammatically in a rather abrupt manner, with no transitional phrase or particle connecting it to what has preceded. But Paul’s statement about freedom here echoes the expression “of the free woman,” which occurs throughout the latter portion of chapter 4 (cf. 4:22, 23, 30, 31). And in fact, Paul has emphasized freedom throughout Galatians (1:4; 2:4, 5; 3:26–28), so much so that freedom has been called the “basic concept underlying Paul’s argument throughout the letter” (Betz, 255). In a bold declaration of the result of the gospel, then, Paul exhorts the Galatians fully to appropriate the new identity they have in Christ.
Since it is true that they are free in Christ, the Galatians are now told to “stand firm” in that freedom. The means of achieving this “standing firm” is to resist being ensnared by the “yoke” of the law (cf. Ac 15:10–11), and thus having their freedom compromised by returning to slavery. The Galatians were in danger of doing just that if they continued to follow after the message of the Judaizers (cf. Martyn, 446–47).
2 With a stern warning, Paul begins a cautionary entreaty that will continue, in somewhat of a digression in his argument, through v.12. He stresses the significance of what he is about to tell them with the idiomatic “mark my words” (ide, GK 2623, “look,” “see,” “take note”). This imperative to be sure to pay strict attention governs all he will say through v.12.
The passive “if you let yourselves be circumcised” is a third-class condition in the Greek text (ean used with the verb in the subjunctive mood), suggesting that the circumcision of the Galatians has in fact not yet occurred but is being seriously considered by them as a means of adhering to the Judaizers’ teaching. It is not the act of circumcision itself to which Paul objects (cf. 1Co 7:17–20) but rather the ritual act of circumcision as a means to righteousness, as a law observance, that he fervently opposes. The imposition of such legalistic circumcision on the Galatians as a requirement for faith is precisely what Paul has argued against throughout the letter (cf. 2:15–16) and which will lead to Christ being of “no [soteriological] value” to them. Thus his warning is an attempt to stave off an action that would bind the Galatians to the false teachers and their message.
3 Paul’s warning to the Galatians is reinforced by the additional notation that if they choose ritual circumcision as a means of righteousness, they have obligated themselves to the yoke or burden of “the whole law.” This statement reinforces the assumption that the Galatians, though they apparently had adopted certain aspects of the Jewish religious calendar (cf. 4:10), had not completely adopted a Jewish lifestyle. They had not yet accepted circumcision as an expression of their faith identity, though they were considering doing so. Paul wants them to understand that if they take that step, they have committed themselves to following all of the law (cf. Jas 2:10).
4 Paul has already warned the Galatians that attempting to be justified by law observance makes Christ “of no value” and obliges one to observe “the whole law.” Now he adds the horrifying statements that one in such a position (i.e., “trying to be justified by law”—the “by law” a functional equivalent to the “by works of the law” or “by observing the law” of 2:16) has been “alienated from Christ” and has “fallen away from grace.” Echoing his argument at 3:1–14, Paul insists that justification by faith in Christ and justification by means of law observance are not complementary, as per the Judaizers, but are in fact mutually exclusive. The Judaizers apparently taught that law observance was the way to complete (“attain [one’s] goal”) or perfect one’s affiliation with Christ (3:3) and that the Mosaic legislation extended the promise to Abraham (3:16–18). Paul writes in these harsh terms in order to persuade the Galatians otherwise. Coupling law with grace in the fashion of the Judaizers makes Christ’s death “for nothing!” (2:21).
5–6 Paul’s argument shifts subtly here in vv.5–6. These two verses must be understood together, as they function at this point of the letter as a tightly packed theological statement that positively recapitulates the whole of Paul’s argument, and “each term and construction of the sentence is significant” (Burton, 279). Paul writes here of the Spirit, implicitly contrasting life in the Spirit with enslavement to law observance. In this way Paul refocuses attention where he began his supportive discussion (3:1–5) of the letter’s propositio (2:15–21) and looks immediately forward to his discussion of life in the Spirit (5:13–18). He writes also about faith, which implicitly recaptures for the Galatians his use of Abraham as the exemplar of justification through faith in the person and promise of God (3:6–18). He states that Christians “eagerly await . . . the righteousness for which we hope,” which often functions as background to Paul’s thought as an expression of the value of present Christian experience (as, e.g., in Ro 2:5–16; 1Th 5:8). And he states that, in Christ, there is no soteriological significance to being circumcised or uncircumcised (cf. 3:28), which is the burden of all that Paul has written to this point. All of this is then followed up with and subsumed in the statement that what does matter for believers in Christ is “faith expressing itself through love.”
These verses are intended by Paul as a reminder to the Galatians that “Christ has set [them] free” (v.1) from slavery to the law. But freedom in Christ does not leave one without a moral compass, as the Judaizers seemingly maintained; there is no necessity for the yoke of the law to guide one’s moral life. Instead, Paul insists here that the operative dynamic for the follower of Jesus is the ethic of love, worked out in one’s life by the Spirit as he enables righteous behavior. This is the proper expression of one’s faith in Christ.
7 Paul now further illustrates his point by employing the image of running a race, an illustration he uses elsewhere for the Christian life (cf. 2:2; 1Co 9:24–27; Php 3:14; 2Ti 4:7). The Galatians had started off well enough (cf. 3:1–5; 4:13–15), but someone had “cut in” on them, crowding their lane and causing them to stumble or veer off course, thus threatening the integrity of their “faith race.” The question “Who cut in on you?” is, of course, rhetorical, designed to provoke the Galatians to recognize that this “cutting in” on them by the Judaizers has caused them to stray from obedience to the truth of the gospel (cf. 3:1), and to prod them back to “running” in a proper fashion.
8 Paul’s imagery now moves from an athletic contest to that of oratory. The Judaizers had used contrived “persuasion” (peismonē, GK 4282) to cause the Galatians to veer off course. The Judaizers had creatively manipulated both the narrative of God’s dealings with Abraham and other Scriptures to buttress their position with regard to law observance, and this was apparently a powerfully persuasive combination. Their teaching had moved the Galatians from “running” along the path of the law-free gospel Paul had preached to them (1:6–10; 3:1–2) to the nomistic course made up of belief in Jesus plus the incorporation of law observance. But, Paul says, this version of the gospel is not from God, who had called them; this is an artifice of the Judaizers, designed to ensnare the Galatians for the Judaizers’ own purposes.
9 Paul now quotes a proverbial saying (cf. 1Co 5:6) to indicate the insidious character of the Judaizers’ “different gospel” (1:6). The inherent danger for the Galatians in this teaching is that as it is taken in, it may permeate their faith and become a corrupting, evil influence that not only perverts the truth but will come to control their lives (cf. Mk 8:15). Paul warns the Galatians again, by implication, to avoid evil consequences by resisting the false message of the Judaizers.
10 Using an epistolary device known as a confidence formula, Paul assures the Galatians of his certainty in the Lord that they will get back on the right track. The foundation for Paul’s confidence is the Lord himself. The Galatians, after all, have expressed faith in the person, word, and work of Jesus Christ, and so will “follow the logic of the gospel” (Bruce, 235; cf. 2Ti 2:11–13). So Paul expresses his conviction that the Galatians will avoid the “other view,” the contrived “persuasion” of the Judaizers (v.8), which threatens to permeate the churches (v.9) and result in “confusion” (v.10).
Paul adds to his expressed confidence in the Galatians a pointed warning to the Judaizers. The Judaizers (collectively referred to as “the one,” in a generic singular) face the judgment of God for their contrived persuasion of the Galatians (cf. 1:8–9). The truth of the gospel message is, of course, of the highest value, both to God and to God’s apostle. Those who arrogate to themselves the role of truth tellers or, especially as the Judaizers in this case, arbiters of truth, will ultimately have the legitimacy of their ministries assessed by God’s impartial judgment. They are responsible before God for the content of their contrived persuasion (cf. Jas 3:1–2). Paul adds here the nonspecific “whoever he may be” either because he was unsure as to identities involved or, more likely, in order to devalue the false teachers by avoiding use of their names.
11 This statement by Paul is rather jarring, appearing to be out of context with what has preceded. Most likely Paul reacts here to charges made against him by the Judaizers, charges to the effect that he has left the demand for circumcision out of his message to the Galatians in order to gain their approval, while he had preached the necessity of circumcision elsewhere (cf. 1:10; 2:1–5; note the circumcision of Timothy, Ac 16:1–3). If that were actually the case, Paul would be guilty of contrived persuasion himself.
But the preaching of circumcision, Paul insists, “abolishes” the offense of the cross. He is persecuted precisely because he has not preached circumcision, because he insists on faith in Jesus Christ, and not law observance, as the means to a proper relationship with God. Though he himself continued more or less to live a Jewish lifestyle (1Co 9:19–23), and would not condemn other Jews for doing so (1Co 7:17–20), to make circumcision or any other aspect of law observance a necessary part of the message of the gospel is antithetical to the truth of freedom in Christ. This is the point Paul has made throughout the section, and it functions here as his final summary statement for his entire argument relative to the Judaizing threat to the Galatians.
12 Paul adds to this summary statement this one final sarcastic comment. This comment is intended as something of a caricature, meant to demean his adversaries and belittle their message. In effect, Paul states that his desire is that the Judaizers, those agitating the Galatians with their insistence on circumcision, would go to extreme lengths with their circumcising implements and “emasculate themselves.” This somewhat crude statement is Paul’s way of reinforcing his message that ritual circumcision is no way to gain God’s soteriological approval. However it is expressed, the drumbeat of Paul’s message throughout the letter has been that it is faith, and not law observance, that is the true message of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
NOTES
4 Some have suggested that “fallen away from grace” is an indication that one might lose salvation. However, both grammatically and in context, it is clear that Paul writes to prevent an action that is only now being contemplated but has not yet been accomplished. Coupled with the aorist tense verbs κατηργήθητε (katērgēthēte, GK 2934, “you have been alienated”) and ἐξεπέσατε (exepesate, GK 1738, “you have fallen away”) the present tense δικαιοῦσθε (dikaiousthe, GK 1467, “trying to be justified”) suggests a present consideration of a future action. Thus, no one has yet lost anything. But if they adopt the course of action they are contemplating as Paul writes to them, the Galatians are in danger of turning away from the only means of a proper relationship with God (cf. Ro 3:25–26).
8 The word “persuasion” (πεισμονή, peismonē) is a rare word, used only here in the NT. Longenecker, 231, points out that later Christian writers use the term to express “empty rhetoric” (cf. Epiphanius, Adversus haereses 30.21.2) and “flattery,” especially human persuasion as opposed to the compelling power of God (cf. Chrysostom, Homilies on 1 Thessalonians on 1:2). Thus, as Longenecker states, it is “contrived persuasiveness” that Paul has in mind in this verse.
OVERVIEW
Paul’s apostolic appeal now focuses on another serious problem affecting his beloved Galatians. The Judaizers had brought the message of nomistic law observance to the Galatian churches, and this situation has consumed much of Paul’s energy in the letter to this point. While the Judaizing threat will remain in the background of all that Paul writes, it will be muted throughout the remainder of the letter. For now, Paul must deal with a concurrent menace, this one from within the churches themselves. The idea of “freedom in Christ” was apparently being embraced by some in a manner that led them to self-centered excesses in morally questionable behavior. This requires that Paul deal with issues pertaining to the ethically proper ordering of the Christian life. He does so in three sections: 5:13–18, in which he discusses the Christian life as governed by God’s Spirit; 5:19–26, in which he shows the contrast between the life governed by the Spirit and life governed by the flesh; and 6:1–10, in which he speaks of practical love.
OVERVIEW
Christian freedom is a precious result of God’s redemptive activity in Christ. But the freedom enjoined by the gospel in the lives of the Galatians was apparently being compromised in various ways. These verses suggest that within the Galatian churches were those who were involved in gratifying their own desires and in self-promotion at the expense of others, leading to strife and factious behavior that is antithetical to what it means to be identified with Christ and to have freedom in him. Paul reminds the believers here that living in the power of God’s Spirit enables them to live a life of love, free from law observance, as a means of regulating their behavior.
13You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love. 14The entire law is summed up in a single command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.” 15If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.
16So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature. 17For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with one another, so that you do not do what you want. 18But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law.
COMMENTARY
13 Returning after the aside of 5:2–12 to the theme of freedom he began at 5:1, Paul once again ties the reality of the Galatians’ freedom in Christ to the call of God (cf. 5:1, 8). God’s redemptive purpose in Christ includes the capacity for the believer to live apart from the constraint of external compulsion with regard to moral life and relationship. The imperative for this moral life is actualized within, by means of the ministry of God’s Spirit though one’s identification with Christ. This is what Paul had in mind earlier when he instructed the Galatians to express faith through love and live in hope of righteousness through the Spirit (vv.5–6).
Freedom that results through faith in Christ, however, must never be expressed by means of the “sinful nature” (sarx, GK 4922, “flesh”). The purpose of freedom is not self-indulgence or self-promotion, which results in strife with others (vv.14–15). The purpose of freedom, biblically speaking, is the capacity to obey God and do his will by being empowered by God’s Spirit to serve one’s neighbor in love.
14 Paul has spoken against the law as a means of justification before God and denied the law as the external guide to Christian living. Here he states that the law is “summed up” in the command to love one’s neighbor as oneself. This mention of the law here has been considered by some as an inconsistency, as Paul speaking against the law for getting in but then opting to use the law in a nomistic fashion for staying in (so Sanders, Paul, the Law, and the Jewish People). Others argue that this is an example of Paul’s outright contradiction in his thought about the law (so Heikki Räisänen, Paul and the Law [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983]). He is said to argue against the law at one point and then to attempt to use the law as a means to govern behavior at another point. Does Paul misunderstand the law? Does he wish to have it both ways, to have his cake and eat it too? How are Christians to relate to the Mosaic legislation?
The key to Paul’s thought in this verse is the term translated “summed up” (peplērōtai, GK 4444, lit., “has been fulfilled;” cf. Mt 5:17–20; Ro 8:4; 13:8–10). Paul does not state here that Christians are to “do” or “perform” the law or works of the law to achieve righteousness or a relationship with God. Rather, he maintains that Christian love fulfills the law, as the result of one’s Christian identity and not as its origin (see the trenchant comments of Stephen Westerholm, Israel’s Law and the Church’s Faith [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988], 201–4). Paul argues earlier against the law as a means to redemption or achieving righteousness. He has no problem with those whose heritage is Jewish to continue law observance as a means to express their devotion to God, as demonstrated by his own practice (again, cf. 1Co 9:19–23). He will not, however, abide the thought that anyone, Jew or Gentile, might gain soteriological favor or standing before God on the basis of the law (cf. 2:11–16). But in Christ, the believer has the Spirit’s enablement to “fulfill” the requirements of the law to love God and love neighbor. Thus, as one loves one’s neighbor in Christ’s Spirit, one fully satisfies the demands of the law. So then, this understanding of Paul’s intent here fully accords with his argument throughout the letter (2:15–21; 3:6–25; 4:21–31).
15 Loving one’s neighbor as fulfillment of the law is the ideal. The Galatians apparently were falling short of that ideal, however, as Paul now finds it necessary to exhort them with regard to their collective misbehavior toward one another. With a first-class conditional construction (assuming the truth of the actions described), Paul says that the Galatians will destroy one another as they continue to “bite” and “devour” each other. This imagery is both sarcastic and shocking as a description of the body of Christ, depicting as it were wild beasts tearing one another to pieces. Paul uses such stark imagery because he is persuaded that the Galatian believers were fighting among themselves as a result of their fleshly attitudes. Their concern for themselves left no room for attention to others’ needs or desires, and the intensity of their self-protective words and deeds could only be described in these dreadful terms. Such selfish ferocity toward one another is antithetical to love, which is accomplished in the Spirit by service to others, without consideration for oneself.
16 Paul now states directly how one is to accomplish a life of Christian love: “live by the Spirit.” Hearkening back to his preceding instructions to “serve one another in love” (v.13) and to fulfill the law (v.14), and looking immediately forward to the “you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature” that follows, this statement emphasizes Paul’s Christian ethic. The believer is to live (lit., “walk”) “by the Spirit” (pneumati, dative of instrumentality, signifying a realm or sphere in which life is to be lived, or a quality of life that is to be lived out). This is not a nomistic lifestyle; nor is it a libertine one. Life “by the Spirit” is the life of freedom to live out the dependent obedience in Christ that Paul has continually exhorted the Galatians to practice (cf. 3:1–5; 5:5). And, he adds, this life “by the Spirit” will never fulfill the desires of the sinful nature. The idea that life “by the Spirit” might fulfill the lusts of the sinful nature is negated with the construction ou mē—the Greek double negative that functions to express categorical impossibility. Quite to the contrary of life “by the Spirit” fulfilling the lusts of the sinful nature, this life fulfills the law by means of love (vv.13–14).
17 Paul explains here his immediately preceding statement. Life “by the Spirit” prevents carrying out the desires of the sinful nature. But living on the basis of the lusts of the sinful nature remains a very real possibility, as Paul’s admonition against the Galatians’ “biting and devouring each other” demonstrates. This is true because the Spirit and the desires of the sinful nature are irreconcilably opposed to one another, resulting in conflict in the life of the believer. Paul is speaking here in behavioral categories regarding the struggle one has in doing right, living by the Spirit, and fulfilling the law. This is then an ethical and not an anthropological or a cosmological dualism of which he speaks. And the result of this ethical dualism with regard to the sinful nature is that “you do not do what you want.” Even though one desires to do good, there is an ongoing struggle to live by the Spirit, and not by the sinful nature (cf. Ro 7:14–25).
18 The word beginning this verse and translated in the NIV as “but” (de) functions here as a simple connective rather than carrying adversative force, and thus simply adds a further thought to what Paul has said rather than establishing a contrast. It should be translated “and,” which allows for an explication of what Paul has said in the previous verse: since believers are “led by the Spirit,” they are not under law. They are then to live in keeping with their freedom in Christ, behaviorally realizing the righteousness that is theirs in him, avoiding the compounding of transgressions that comes by living under the law (cf. 3:19–25). The answer to the struggle of the conflict in one’s life between the lusts of the sinful nature and the presence of the Spirit can be found in being “led” by the Spirit (“live by the Spirit,” v.16; cf. Ro 7:14–8:11) and not in the law observance of the Judaizers.
NOTES
13 There is some difficulty in interpreting Paul’s use of the term σαρξ (sarx, “flesh”) in 5:13–6:10. Elsewhere in the letter he employs the term to express mere humanity or physicality (1:16; 2:16, 20; 4:13–14, 23, 29; but cf. 3:3). Yet in 5:13–6:10, the term clearly has ethical implications. Many have helpfully suggested that “flesh” used ethically has to do with humanity’s fallen, corrupt, or sinful nature as opposed to humanity as created by God (so Burton, 492–95; cf. Bruce, 240). But simply translating the word literally (so KJV, NRSV, NASB) has created a measure of unnecessary confusion and encourages an anthropological dualism with which the church has historically struggled. As a response, others have tried to give a more interpretive rendering, such as the NIV’s “sinful nature.” This avoids the notion that the human body as created by God is itself evil, yet includes the understanding that, as presently constituted (“in Adam”), there is an essential facet of being human that is opposed to God and God’s Spirit. Such an expanded translation is thus to be preferred.
14 The term πεπλήρωται (peplērōtai, “has been fulfilled,” perfect passive indicative; NIV, “summed up”) carries with it the connotation of bringing to full expression that which is inherent in the nature of the thing brought to completion. As such, it is not merely a summation, but a bringing to fruition or maturity. “Fulfill” is thus Paul’s way of stating that life in Christ as empowered by God’s Spirit brings out in the life of the believer all that was inherent in the Mosaic legislation as a means to living in relationship to God and to one’s neighbor. For more on how Paul’s thought here has been understood, see Rapa, 15–51.
16 The Greek double “no” οὐ μή (ou mē, “no not,” “no never”) is an emphatic negation, highlighting in the strongest possible grammatical terms the impossibility of the thing being denied. Thus the rendering in the NRSV of Paul’s denial of this possibility as imperatives (“Live by the Spirit, I say, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh”; italics added to indicate the imperative) misconstrues the nature of Paul’s comment here. The believer will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature if he or she lives by the Spirit.
OVERVIEW
This section expands on Paul’s immediately prior discussion in that Paul will detail here what it means to live by “the acts of the sinful nature” (v.19) as contrasted to life “by the Spirit” (v.16). Libertinism focuses on freedom to “indulge the sinful nature” (v.13), and the results of such an orientation are behaviors that are ethically unacceptable for the Christian. By contrast, serving one another “in love” (v.13) and walking “by the Spirit” (v.16) result in lives that fulfill God’s purposes for his people.
Paul’s structure in these verses follows the pattern of Hellenistic “vice-virtue” lists common in the literature of the day. Such lists were written to characterize improper behavior as contrasted to what would be ideal behavior, or what the life of a model citizen in Greek society would look like (cf. Aristotle, Rhet. 1.9.4). Paul uses the “vice-virtue” form because it had communicative currency and afforded him the means to advance his position by clearly contrasting the manifest superiority of life by the Spirit with its positive results to that of life by the acts of the sinful nature and the devastating consequences such a life would bring to its practitioners.
This section divides neatly into two parts, the first dealing with the lusts of the sinful nature and the consequences of living by those lusts (vv.19–22), and the second detailing life by the Spirit with its results (vv.23–26). Expanding on the incompatibility between the sinful nature and the Spirit (vv.16–17), Paul begins by listing the obvious manifestation of the lusts generated by the sinful nature. Such behaviors were universally recognized in the ancient world as wrong, and one did not need the Mosaic legislation to determine their sinful character (cf. Ro 1:24–32; 2:12–15). Further, Paul’s inventory of these behaviors under the “works of the flesh” may hint at the notion that he understands the Galatians’ libertine tendencies as a corollary perversion of the gospel to the Judaizers’ “works of the law” (cf. 3:2–3; Longenecker, 252–53). The result of human effort, whether religiously oriented (Judaizers’ “works of the law”) or merely doing what comes naturally (Galatians’ libertine “acts of the sinful nature”) is likewise a perversion of God’s purpose for human life in relation to himself.
Paul’s summary of vices contains fifteen items. This list is not intended to be exhaustive (cf. “and the like,” v.21). Rather, the list represents the awful kinds of behaviors manifested by sinful, rebellious humanity apart from God’s Spirit. And Paul may or may not have been thinking of specific categories of sins as he wrote. Attempts to systematize the apostle’s thought here have been various, but the most helpful (if not quite “obvious”; cf. Boice, 496) is that which utilizes the fourfold division of Lightfoot, 210, and Burton, 304 (adopted by the NIV and several other modern translations). As laid out by Burton, the list breaks down as follows: (1) three sins of “sensuality in the narrower sense” (sexual immorality, impurity, debauchery); (2) sins “associated with heathen religions” (idolatry, witchcraft); (3) eight sins “in which the element of conflict with others is present” (hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions, envy); and (4) “drunkenness and its natural accompaniments” (drunkenness and orgies).
The summary of life “by the Spirit” contains nine items, representative of the Spirit’s influence in one’s life. As with the catalog of vices, this list is also undoubtedly nonexhaustive in intent. In contrast to the desires of the sinful nature, the “fruit of the Spirit” is positively oriented and is a natural result of one’s association with Christ. The singular “fruit” suggests that these qualities are a unity, all present to some degree in the life of each believer.
The virtues listed here have, like the desires of the sinful nature, been classified and grouped in different ways. But these attributes may be helpfully grouped for purposes of discussion into three categories of three qualities each (so Lightfoot, 212; Betz, 287–88). According to Lightfoot’s classification, the first group includes “habits of mind in their more general aspect” (love, joy, peace); the second group includes “special qualities affecting a man’s intercourse with his neighbor” (patience, kindness, goodness); and the third group is made up of “principles which guide a Christian’s conduct” (faithfulness, gentleness, self-control). The stark contrast of this “fruit of the Spirit” as opposed to the “acts of the sinful nature” will put an exclamation point on Paul’s exhortation to the Galatians to “serve one another in love” (v.13).
19The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. 25Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. 26Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying one another.
COMMENTARY
19 Paul’s list of “obvious” vices, the “acts of the sinful nature,” begins with sexual sins. In the Greco-Roman world, sexual activity was exceedingly common and not always regarded as particularly disgraceful. Practicing personal restraint in this realm would be marked out as unusual, as one having “an almost miraculous power to live in purity” (William Barclay, Flesh and Spirit: An Examination of Galatians 5:19–23 [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1976], 28). Believers’ lives of sexual purity in such a milieu became a testimony to the potent efficacy of the gospel to enable one to live free from moral laxity. “Sexual immorality” (porneia, GK 4518) is a word originally connoting prostitution, but in the NT it is used as a summary term for sexual sin more generally. This word is perhaps listed first as a general means to stress the lusts of the sinful nature, as “love” may be mentioned first in the next series to emphasize the fruit of the Spirit. “Impurity” (akatharsia, GK 174) suggests moral laxity or sexual promiscuity, another common vice in the ancient world. “Debauchery” (aselgeia, GK 816) pictures extreme sexual uncleanness or perversion. Thus, “sensuality in the narrower sense” centers in sexual expression of one’s sinful nature.
20–21 Sins “associated with heathen religions” make up the next section. “Idolatry” (eidōlolatria, GK 1630), as used in the NT, includes not merely the notion of worshiping an image of a god but also eating food offered to another god (cf. 1Co 5:10–11; 6:9; 1Pe 4:3) or to being covetous or greedy (Col 3:5). “Witchcraft” (pharmakeia, GK 5758) carries the connotation of using drugs for nefarious purposes, such as poisoning someone or in the practice of sorcery. The term is used in this latter sense in this context. Thus, both the practice of worshiping false gods and using drugs to enhance mystical worship experience are included as part of what it means to live according to the “acts of the sinful nature.”
“The element of conflict with others” is included here as well. These elements are “hatred” (echthrai, GK 2397), most likely encompassing both hostility toward God and one’s fellow human; “discord” (eris, GK 2251), a sinful unwillingness to get along with others; “jealousy” (zēlos, GK 2419), a word that can be used positively of intense fervor or devotion (“zeal”) but here must mean an intensely negative feeling of resentment toward another’s welfare or wanting what another has; “fits of rage” (thymoi, GK 2596), another word that can be positive (“courage”) but in this context in the plural can only be construed negatively as bouts of anger; “selfish ambition” (eritheiai, GK 2249), indicating self-seeking or working for one’s own gain at the expense of others, the antithesis of love (cf. Burton, 308); “dissensions” (dichostasiai, GK 1496), referring to “sedition” in political contexts, here suggesting manipulation of others’ sensibilities for the advancement of one’s personal agenda; “factions” (haireseis, GK 146, the word from which “heresy” is derived), sinful separation of numbers of people from others in the group on the basis of opinions or actions; and “envy” (phthonoi, GK 5784), ill-will toward others for what those others have or represent. These elements of conflict clearly emanate from fallen human nature, sinful at its base, and do not promote biblical freedom or serving in love.
The final section of Paul’s listing of desires of the sinful nature includes “drunkenness and its accompaniments.” “Drunkenness” (methai, GK 3494) pictures common carousing and reveling which often characterized festal processions in honor of the gods, especially Bacchus (or Dionysus), the god of wine. “Orgies” (kōmoi, GK 3269) were concomitants with such drunkenness, and these two words most often occur together as descriptive of the excesses arising out of such wild abandon.
Paul ends this listing of life in the sinful nature with the stern warning he had given them “before” (likely referencing such teaching when he was with them in the initial proclamation of the gospel to them). He had taught them that “those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.” The phraseology of this warning appears to be a portion of an early Christian baptismal or catechetical formula (cf. Longenecker, 258). Paul uses this formula here both to remind the Galatians of his earlier teaching and to cause them to recognize the seriousness of their actions. Those who insist on exercising their freedom in libertine excesses to indulge the sinful nature are in danger of being left out of the inheritance of the kingdom of God, which is essentially ethical (cf. Ro 14:17–18).
22–23 In bold contrast to the “desires of the sinful nature” is the “fruit of the Spirit.” “Fruit” (karpos, GK 2843) is used metaphorically here and is said to be “of the Spirit” (tou pneumatos) as contrasted to the above “acts of the sinful nature” (erga tēs sarkos). It has been suggested that Paul uses the notion of fruit rather than acts in order to emphasize the character of these qualities as “received” from God (Burton, 313). But this view implies an ethical lassitude on the part of the believer that does not fit the context (cf. vv.13–14, 16, 25) or the picture of the Christian life elsewhere (cf. 2Co 9:8; Php 2:12–13; 2Pe 1:3–8). These are God-given qualities, to be sure, but the believer is to be actively engaging this fruitfulness in service to others (5:13–14).
Paul begins his discussion of the fruit of the Spirit with “habits of mind in their more general aspect,” including “love” (agapē, GK 27), “joy” (chara, GK 5915) and “peace” (eirēnē, GK 1645). “Love” is listed first because Paul undoubtedly believed it to be the most important of the virtues (cf. 1Co 13:13) and because all of the others may be understood to be included in it and to flow out from it. Indeed, love is to be the operative dynamic of the Christian life, as has been emphasized throughout this section (cf. vv.6, 13, 14). The term agapē is the customary NT word for the quality governing personal relationships, and it reflects the manner in which God has chosen to deal with sinful humanity in the person, word, and work of Jesus Christ (though the notion of this word reflecting only “God-like, self-sacrificial love” is a misconstrual; cf. Jn 3:19, where agapē is used of humanity’s “love” for moral darkness due to the evil of its deeds). “Joy” (chara) was a word often used generally to describe religious feeling arising out of a conscious relationship to the gods (Burton, 314). But for Paul, joy has its basis in the presence of the Spirit in one’s life and is associated with “righteousness,” “peace” (Ro 14:17), and “hope” (Ro 5:2, 11). The term “peace” (eirēnē) indicates wholeness in relationships, most notably one’s relationship to God. Believers in Christ receive this peace, which guards one’s mind (Php 4:7) and one’s relationships (Col 3:15) and is to be the chief relational dynamic in the home (1Co 7:15) and in the church (1Co 14:33).
The “special qualities” affecting interpersonal relationships are listed next. These are “patience” (makrothymia, GK 3429), “kindness” (chrēstotēs, GK 5983) and “goodness” (agathōsynē, GK 20). “Patience” is expressed in being long-suffering, in enduring hardship or wrong without complaint or thought of vengeance (cf. 2Co 6:6; Eph 4:2; Col 1:11; 3:12; 2Ti 3:10; Heb 6:12). It is the virtue especially enjoined for Christians to exercise toward one another in the body of Christ (Eph 4:2; Col 1:11; 1Th 5:14). “Kindness” is an attribute of God himself (cf. Ps 34:8; Lk 6:35; 1Pe 2:3) and is to be practiced by the believer by means of reflecting God’s kindness when relating to others (Eph 4:32). “Goodness” may be for the most part parallel to “kindness,” but in this context it probably also carries the additional nuance of generosity, however that is expressed (Bruce, 253–54).
The final triad in Paul’s depiction of the fruit of the Spirit relates to Christian conduct more generally. These include “faithfulness” (pistis, GK 4411; used elsewhere in Galatians with respect to one’s trust in God for deliverance in Christ but in this context assuredly referencing an ethical virtue), “gentleness” (prautēs, GK 4559), and “self-control” (enkrateia, GK 1602). “Faithfulness” speaks to the issue of one’s dependability, the quality of reliability in various circumstances. It may suggest here constancy in the face of persecution or devastating personal loss. “Gentleness” indicates a mildness that is not easily provoked or angered (cf. Nu 12:3; Mt 5:5; 11:29; 2Co 10:1) and includes the notion of showing consideration for others (Burton, 317). “Self-control” is the quality of mastery over one’s impulses and faculties, lending aid in one’s struggle in resisting temptation.
Paul ends his catalog of the fruit of the Spirit with the notation that “against such things there is no law.” These words are something of a mild understatement for rhetorical effect, reinforcing the apostle’s earlier assertion that the manifestation of this fruit of the Spirit fulfills the law (5:14). As such, this catalog of fruitfulness closes Paul’s virtue chain with a subtle augmentation of the superiority of life in the Spirit over a life of law observance.
24 Drawing a preliminary conclusion from what has just preceded (vv.19–23), Paul now reminds the Galatians that being united with Christ by participation in his death is to be done with the living out of the “passions and desires” of the sinful nature. In this way he reinforces these immediately prior words by indicating that those who “belong to Christ Jesus” cannot live lives of libertinism. Using imagery reminiscent of his earlier depiction of living by faith in the person and work of Christ by means of “co-crucifixion” (2:19–21), Paul brings into sharp focus the need for believers to put to death sinful actions, cravings, and desires.
25 Paul draws here a second, hortatory conclusion from the catalog of vices and virtues above: those who claim to live by the Spirit should demonstrate that fact by a lifestyle that is in keeping with the presence and purpose of the Spirit. The wording used for this admonition is “keep in step” with the Spirit (stoicheō, GK, 5123, lit., “in a row”; cf. 4:3, 9). Stoicheō was commonly used to suggest agreement or to be in line with another. Paul has used it elsewhere to indicate walking in another’s footsteps (Ro 4:12) and living according to a standard (Gal 6:16; Php 3:16; cf. Ac 21:24). So here Paul instructs the Galatians to live out their faith in appropriate ways, empowered by the Spirit, following his ethical guidance and direction.
26 This verse functions both as a summary exhortation to avoid the sinful behaviors discussed in what has preceded (alluding especially to those behaviors mentioned at v.15) and as a bridge to the discussion of practical love that follows (6:1–10). Implied here is factious behavior that has caused division and strife in the assembly, something that is definitely “of the sinful nature” and not “in step with the Spirit.” This factious behavior is also not the means whereby believers may express practical love toward one another. It is to this latter responsibility that Paul now turns.
OVERVIEW
In this final section of the apostle’s appeal against libertinism, Paul will relate the practical means whereby the Galatians might implement what it means to “live by” and “keep in step with” the Spirit. Exhorting the believers through a series of conventional instructions regarding both individual and corporate responsibilities in service, Paul encourages them to follow lives of loving ministry to one another and to all with whom they come into contact.
Some have suggested that these conventional instructions are Paul’s ongoing refutation of the Judaizers’ teaching. These directions are then to be interpreted as Paul’s further polemical rejoinder to the Judaizers’ ethical instruction. Others see these words as a series of more or less disconnected moral aphorisms that Paul has simply co-opted for his own use. Such understandings fail to appreciate, however, how well integrated these words are in Paul’s discussion of life in the Spirit. In the words of John Barclay, 167, “[These words] represent Paul’s desire to give concrete instructions, to spell out for the Galatians in practical terms what it means to ‘walk in the Spirit.’ Many of these maxims function as practical illustrations of the ingredients of the ‘fruit of the Spirit’—e.g., ‘meekness’ (6:2), ‘self-control’ (5:26; 6:4), ‘long-suffering’ (6:9–10), and ‘goodness’ (6:6, 10)—and thus serve to ‘earth’ these abstract qualities in detailed moral instruction.” As such, these directives serve as a fitting conclusion to the apostle’s injunction to believers to “keep in step with the Spirit.”
1Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted. 2Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ. 3If anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he deceives himself. 4Each one should test his own actions. Then he can take pride in himself, without comparing himself to somebody else, 5for each one should carry his own load.
6Anyone who receives instruction in the word must share all good things with his instructor.
7Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows. 8The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life. 9Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. 10Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers.
COMMENTARY
1 Paul has already described the struggle with sinfulness that believers may have (5:15, 17). He now addresses what believers are to do in the case of “someone . . . caught in a sin” (a third-class “more probable” condition). If a fellow believer is overtaken and entrapped by sin, others are to bring that person to the state of restoration, i.e., back “in step with the Spirit.” Such moral lapses will occur, but these moral lapses must never be allowed to compromise the “life in the Spirit” of a fellow believer. Nor should such lapses amount to an occasion of feeling superior on the part of those who have not so fallen. This injunction to gentle treatment of others may have been occasioned by pride on the part of some due to the fact that they had not so fallen (the conceited or provokers to envy of 5:26?). But Paul warns the Galatians against such a display by reminding them that they too “may be tempted.” The one who has committed sin must be treated “gently,” with the love of Christ (cf. 5:13–14).
Those who are to act as restorers are described as “spiritual.” It has been suggested that Paul uses this term ironically (i.e., there are no true “spiritual” Galatians at this point). Others have inferred that this term indicates the self-description of either a libertine or legalistic group within the Galatian congregations, as they distinguished themselves and their “superior” understanding from others in the assembly (à la 1Co 1–4). Aside from the fact that we have no certain knowledge of such a formal distinction in differing factions within the Galatian churches, there is a contextually and linguistically based explanation for the term “spiritual.”
Paul has repeatedly spoken of the Galatian believers in relationship to God’s Spirit (cf. 3:2–5, 14; 4:6, 29; 5:5, 16–18, 22–23, 25; see also 6:8). Thus, contextually, all believers are “spiritual” in the sense that all believers are possessed by and in possession of the Spirit of God. As well, the term “spiritual” (pneumatikos, GK 4461) utilizes the demonstrative adjectival form of the term “spirit” (the -ikos suffix attached to the noun pneuma), which is used to designate “source” or “affiliation.” Thus, linguistically all believers are “spiritual” by virtue of the fact that all believers are “of the Spirit.” Paul’s admonition to restore the sinful, then, is directed to everyone in the assembly, as all are presumed to be “in Christ” and thus all are presumed to be recipients of God’s Spirit. By reminding the Galatians of their identity in Christ, Paul is holding them accountable to live up to that status. And it is worth noting that his comments here are directed more to the “spiritual” than to the “sinner.”
2 Paul next addresses one means by which believers may express their unity in Christ. Rather than celebrating their own moral excellence compared to those who have fallen into sin, believers must aid those who struggle with sinfulness. Joining together to restore one who has sinned or to prevent others from being “caught in a sin” in the first place is a way that believers may “serve one another in love” (5:13; cf. Ro 15:1–3). By collectively taking on themselves the burden of temptation experienced by others, believers are able to ameliorate the impact that such temptation may have, to the mutual benefit of all attempting to keep in step with the Spirit. Such burden bearing “fulfills the law of Christ,” which is to love as Christ loved, surrendering one’s life for the good of others (cf. Jn 13:34–35).
3 Paul supports his immediately prior instructions by utilizing a statement from conventional wisdom. He adapts this common maxim to address the issue at hand: conceit (thinking of oneself as something when, in fact, one is as “nothing”) does not lend itself to burden bearing or other actions and attitudes of mutual love. This kind of self-deceit is in fact itself sinful and does not promote one’s “keeping in step with the Spirit.” Thus the aphorism functions here as a fitting warning against failing appropriately to care for others.
4 Paul follows up his warning with a brief explanation. When one has tested (dokimazō, GK 1507, “test,” “examine,” “approve”) one’s actions with regard to the conceit about which Paul has been writing and finds no cause for concern, then one may have grounds for “pride.” The word “pride” (kauchēma, GK 3017) refers here more to glad exultation than vulgar self-promotion (Burton, 333), and so is not in this case a manifestation of sinful self-will. It is relief over the minimization of self-deception that is in view here. When one is not self-deceived, one has occasion to rejoice in God’s grace in one’s life. And there is no need sinfully to compare oneself to others when one has a proper understanding of oneself with regard to attitudes and behavior.
5 Using another conventional maxim, Paul reinforces the notion that each one should take responsibility for himself or herself with regard to avoiding self-deception or conceit (“carry his own load”). Each person bears the responsibility to examine himself or herself with regard to aspects of “life in the Spirit” and faith (cf. 1Co 11:28–31; 2Co 13:5).
6 This statement is at first glance rather puzzling, both in its form and in its placement here in Paul’s instructions to the Galatians. There is no ethical maxim leading into the instruction, as in his earlier discussion. The directive is also different in content from what he says at other points on the subject of financial or material provision for teachers (cf. 1Co 9:3–14; 1Ti 5:18). Here, he directs the Galatian congregations to “share all good things” with their instructors. He is not asking for remuneration for himself—he is not present among them teaching—but is reminding the Galatians of their responsibility toward those who are currently their instructors (those who teach in keeping with Paul’s doctrine and not that of the Judaizers; cf. v.16).
Paul speaks here of both those who receive instruction and those who instruct. This fact implies in the Galatian congregations some type of formal teaching situation centered in “the word” (Paul’s shorthand for the message of the gospel and Christianity; cf. 1Co 1:18; 2Co 5:19; Eph 1:13; Php 1:14; Col 1:25; 1Th 1:6; 2:13; 2Ti 4:2). We can assume therefore that Paul addresses here a failure on the part of the Galatian congregations adequately to compensate their teachers by reminding them that they have a responsibility to support those who care for them in this vital ministry. In keeping with the general tone of brotherly love and responsibility toward one another in vv.1–5, this instruction may not be so much out of place as it first appears to be.
7–8 These verses form a cautionary exhortation to the Galatians that failure to live according to Paul’s instructions will carry a heavy price. Using a common NT warning formula (“do not be deceived”; cf. Lk 21:8; 1Co 6:9; 15:33; Jas 1:16), Paul serves notice that these words are to be taken seriously. Paul reminds the Galatian believers that “God cannot be mocked.” This statement of proverbial wisdom serves to underline and buttress what Paul will state next: whatever one sows, one will reap. One cannot expect to sow to the sinful nature and reap eternal life. The harvest of sin is “destruction” (cf. 5:19–21), while “eternal life” is concomitant to the cultivation of the fruit of the Spirit (5:22–23). The libertine propensities of the Galatians of which Paul has spoken in this section (quarreling, conceit, and envy, 5:26; refusing or failing to recognize the legitimate needs of others, 6:1–2, 6; pride, 6:3–4) do not lead to life; in fact, as he has already mentioned, “those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God” (5:21).
9 As a conclusion to the warning and explanation of vv.7–8, Paul encourages the Galatians to “not become weary” by reminding them that in God’s proper time (the sense of the term kairos, GK 2789, “time,” “season”; cf. 4:4) a harvest will result from their efforts to “do good.” “Doing good” here represents all that a Christian might be expected to do and is thus identical to the concept of the fruit of the Spirit (Betz, 309). Paul speaks often of perseverance (cf. 1Co 15:50, 58; 16:13; Php 1:27–28; 2:15; 4:1; 1Th 3:5, 13; 5:23), and calls on believers here not only to recognize that they have by God’s grace been justified by faith in Christ (2:16) and cleansed from guilt and received the Spirit (3:2–5), but also to recognize the need to persevere in life “by the Spirit.”
10 Paul ends his anti-libertine exhortation to the Galatians (5:13–6:10) with this inferential conclusion. Believers are to take advantage of every God-given opportunity (again using the term kairos) to do good. This is not merely Paul consigning the Christian ethic to serendipity or presenting behavioral righteousness as an option of convenience, as though he were suggesting some “Christianized” version of the call to carpe diem (“seize the day”). Rather, he exhorts believers here to maintain a holy awareness or sensitivity to opportunities God places before us to live out the fruit of the Spirit.
Christian ethical and social responsibility, Paul further indicates here, is all-embracing (“let us do good to all people”). Believers, as those who are “spiritual” (6:1), have both the Spirit-given empowerment and the God-given opportunities positively to affect the world around them by keeping in step with the Spirit. We have obligation, then, to manifest the Spirit’s presence (“fruit”) in our lives while among our fellow believers (vv.1–4, 10) and to all those outside as well (v.10; cf. Ro 1:14).
NOTES
1 The word πνευματικός (pneumatikos, “spiritual”) is formed as a demonstrative adjective by the addition of the -ικός suffix to the noun πνεῦμα, pneuma, “spirit.” This grammatical construction utilizing the -ικός suffix dates from at least the Homeric period and is used to signify ethically “belonging to,” “pertaining to,” or “having the characteristics of” (J. H. Moulton and W. F. Howard, A Grammar of New Testament Greek: Accidence and Word Formation [Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1929], 2:377–79). Thus, one who is πνευματικός both possesses and is possessed by and manifests the behavioral fruit of the Spirit (5:22–23).
9 The word καιρός (kairos, “time,” “season,” “appointed or proper time”) reflects a specific period, an occasion rather than an extent of time. As such, in the NT the word is used to suggest a “propitious situation,” the “right moment,” or even a “divinely provided opportunity” (cf. TDNT 3:455–62). Thus in Paul’s usage in Galatians it points to God’s movement in redemptive history and the opportunity for God’s people to be those who understand the times and act accordingly, by the Spirit.