Inter-Varsity Press

Contents

General preface

Author’s preface to the first edition

Preface to the second edition

Introduction

Who were the Galatians?

Why was the letter written?

When was the letter written?

Why did the Galatians fall away so soon?

What is theologically central to the letter?

The validity of Paul’s argument from experience

Important issues in the letter

Analysis

Commentary

Additional notes

The meaning of ‘pneuma’ (5:16)

The ‘kingdom of God’ (5:21)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AUTHOR’S PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION

The Epistle to the Galatians is spiritual dynamite, and it is therefore almost impossible to handle it without explosions. It has often been so in the history of the church. The great spiritual awakening of Martin Luther came as he expounded and studied this Epistle, while it was a sermon on Galatians that brought peace of heart to John Wesley. Small wonder that both of these men dearly loved the book; it spoke directly from Paul’s experience to their own. But this letter is not one with a message simply for those of centuries earlier than ours, nor is it an Epistle that can be read in comfortable detachment without personal involvement. At every point it challenges our present-day shallow, easy acceptances and provokes our opposition.

It was a controversial letter; and it is vain to expect any commentator, however humble, to avoid controversy when expounding it – especially when the issues are just as alive today. The only danger is that we may try to use God’s Word as a ‘big stick’ wherewith to belabour our theological opponents instead of allowing the exegesis to search our own hearts and condemn our own cherished presuppositions.

What, then, is the Epistle to the Galatians? It is a statement of Paul’s gospel, which is also that of the church universal. It is an apologia pro vita sua by the prince of apostles. So far, so good; but already we may be on dangerous ground. For Paul was a man whose ‘orders’ were not accepted by many of his fellow-countrymen. His claim to apostleship they regarded as unwarranted. More; in its refusal to allow salvation to depend on anything save the work done for helpless man by God almighty, and enjoyed by a faith which is itself the gift of God, it is a cry for Christian freedom. True, this condemns those who make salvation depend on forms and ceremonies as well as on faith in Christ (for the crime of the Judaizers was not that they substituted something for Christ’s work, but that they tried to add something to it). But it equally condemns those earnest Christians who subconsciously make salvation depend, not only on faith in Christ, but also on the observance of negative moral laws (‘There are three things I will not do…’, in the words of the old negro spiritual). Which of us can throw the first stone?

Furthermore, at the risk of being accused of an anachronism, it could be said that Galatians is a passionate appeal for Inter-Communion. The table-fellowship for which Paul fought at Antioch was certainly not restricted to the Lord’s Table, but it is hard to see how it could have failed to include it. On a matter like this, it is painfully easy to allow our own pet theological or ecclesiastical prejudices to blind our eyes; but Paul’s reaction is obvious. He cannot conceive the possibility of two groups of Christians in one place who refuse to eat with each other because of theological scruples (for we wrong the Judaizers if we fail to realize that, whatever we may think about the ‘playacting’ of Peter and Barnabas, this was a real theological scruple with them).

Again, there seems to be here a recognition that it is possible for the church of God to be one without being uniform in custom, habit, or sphere. Paul never seems to have compelled the Gentile churches to act like Jews; indeed, this is precisely the charge that he brings against the erring Peter. Now those of us with a ‘Reformed’ background find this congenial and easy to understand. But it remains equally true that he does not expect Jewish churches to act like Gentile believers; he never says that it is wrong for them to be circumcised, or to keep the law, or to observe the festivals. All he insists is that these things have nothing to do with the gift of salvation. Not only so, but here is also a glad recognition of differences of sphere appointed by God: Paul is to go to the Gentiles; James and the rest are to work among the Jews.

This involves full mutual recognition, which is symbolized, not by any supplemental ordination, but by the offering of the ‘right hand of fellowship’. Mutual trust, mutual acceptance, mutual recognition: was this a slender platform on which to work? Yet it was on such a basis that the whole Mediterranean basin was won for Christ.

These are hard sayings for all of us; and who can hear them? Yet, if this is indeed the message of Galatians for today, surely we neglect it at our peril.

R.A.C.

PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION

The literature on Galatians, which aroused such attention in the heady days of the Reformation, is immense. It would be pretentious, in a work of this limited size, to attempt to refer to all the commentators of the past. Any modern commentator on this letter is only a dwarf on the shoulders of giants, and happy is the one who has absorbed, sometimes unconsciously or even at second hand, the quintessence of the wisdom of the past.

I have refrained from quoting Luther and Calvin, or later giants like Ramsay and Lightfoot: but I would not wish that to be taken as a failure to acknowledge their worth. Among modern commentators, particular tribute must be paid to Burton (ICC), with his careful and exact linguistic approach, although this now needs to be modified in some areas because of further linguistic evidence. Bruce (NIGNTC) is, as always, careful and erudite, a mine of information, with many historical, linguistic and theological gems especially in his footnotes. Ridderbos (NICNT) is solid and theological, in the ‘reformed’ pattern, although somewhat succinct. Guthrie (NCBC) is painstaking and thorough, with a particularly good introduction.

Cousar (Interpretation Series) has many penetrating insights. But the prince of them all is Betz (Hermeneia Series), and on him I have drawn particularly heavily, especially for his keen theological interpretations, and his suggestions as to the factors that left the Galatians particularly open to new false teaching.

Other commentators will be mentioned by name for specific points as they occur, but most, for obvious and praiseworthy reasons, tend to repeat one another over much of the area, and there is nothing therefore to be gained by simply piling up names.

The text chosen as basis for this revision of my commentary is the RSV. The source of other translations is noted in brackets immediately after the quotation. Throughout the Commentary, I have also included my own paraphrase of the text of Galatians, usually section by section, and this is printed within single quotation marks.

It is a joy to write this Second Edition from the midst of an Asian church, facing many of the same problems as the Galatians. It is my humble hope that readers will find its relevance to their own situation too.

R.A.C.