Galatians

Introduction to the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Galatian

CLA_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 3

INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE

APOSTLE TO THE GALATIANS.

THE authenticity of this epistle is ably vindicated by Dr. Paley: the principal part of his arguments I shall here introduce, and doubt not that they will be considered demonstrative evidence by every candid and unprejudiced reader.

Section 1.

CLA_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 3

SECTION 1.

The argument of this epistle in some measure proves its antiquity. It will hardly be doubted that it was written whilst the dispute concerning the circumcision of Gentile converts was fresh in men’s minds; for, even supposing it to have been a forgery, the only credible motive that can be assigned for the forgery was, to bring the name and authority of the apostle into this controversy. No design could be so insipid, or so unlikely to enter into the thoughts of any man, as to produce an epistle written earnestly and pointedly upon one side of a controversy, when the controversy itself was dead, and the question no longer interesting to any description of readers whatever. Now the controversy concerning the circumcision of the Gentile Christians was of such a nature that, if it arose at all, it must have arisen in the beginning of Christianity. As Judea was the scene of the Christian history; as the author and preachers of Christianity were Jews; as the religion itself acknowledged and was founded upon the Jewish religion, in contradistinction to every other religion then professed amongst mankind; it was not to be wondered at that some of its teachers should carry it out in the world rather as a sect and modification of Judaism, than as a separate original revelation; or that they should invite their proselytes to those observances in which they lived themselves. This was likely to happen; but if it did not happen at first, if, whilst the religion was in the hands of Jewish teachers, no such claim was advanced, no such condition was attempted to be imposed, it is not probable that the doctrine would be started, much less that it should prevail, in any future period. I likewise think that those pretensions of Judaism were much more likely to be insisted upon whilst the Jews continued a nation, than after their fall and dispersion; whilst Jerusalem and the temple stood, than after the destruction brought upon them by the Roman arms, the total cessation of the sacrifice and the priesthood, the humiliating loss of their country, and, with it, of the great rites and symbols of their institution. It should seem, therefore, from the nature of the subject, and the situation of the parties, that this controversy was carried on in the interval between the preaching of Christianity to the Gentiles and the invasion of Titus; and that our present epistle, which was undoubtedly intended to bear a part in this controversy, must be referred to the same period.

But again: the epistle supposes that certain designing adherents of the Jewish law had crept into the Churches of Galatia, and had been endeavouring, and but too successfully, to persuade the Galatic converts that they had been taught the new religion imperfectly, and at second hand; that the founder of their Church himself possessed only an inferior and deputed commission, the seat of truth and authority being in the apostles and elders of Jerusalem; moreover, that, whatever he might profess amongst them, he had himself, at other times and in other places, given way to the doctrine of circumcision. The epistle is unintelligible without supposing all this. Referring therefore to this, as to what had actually passed, we find St. Paul treating so unjust an attempt to undermine his credit, and to introduce amongst his converts a doctrine which he had uniformly reprobated, in terms of great asperity and indignation. And, in order to refute the suspicions which had been raised concerning the fidelity of his teaching, as well as to assert the independency and Divine original of his mission, we find him appealing to the history of his conversion, to his conduct under it, to the manner in which he had conferred with the apostles when he met with them at Jerusalem; alleging that, so far was his doctrine from being derived from them, or they from exercising any superiority over him, that they had simply assented to what he had already preached amongst the Gentiles, and which preaching was communicated not by them to him, but by himself to them; that he had maintained the liberty of the Gentile Church, by opposing upon one occasion an apostle to the face, when the timidity of his behaviour seemed to endanger it; that from the first, that all along, that to that hour, he had constantly resisted the claims of Judaism; and that the persecutions which he daily underwent, at the hands or by the instigation of the Jews, and of which he bore in his person the marks and scars, might have been avoided by him, if he had consented to employ his labours in bringing, through the medium of Christianity, converts over to the Jewish institution; for then would the offence of the cross have ceased.” Now an impostor, who had forged the epistle for the purpose of producing St. Paul’s authority in the dispute, which, as hath been observed, is the only credible motive that can be assigned for the forgery, might have made the apostle deliver his opinion upon the subject in strong an decisive terms, or might have put his name to a train of reasoning and argumentation upon that side of the question which the imposture was intended to recommend. I can allow the possibility of such a scheme as that. But for a writer, with this purpose in view, to feign a series of transactions supposed to have passed amongst the Christians of Galatia, and then to counterfeit expressions of anger and resentment excited by these transactions; to make the apostle travel back into his own history, and into a recital of various passages of his life, some indeed directly, but others obliquely, and others even obscurely bearing upon the point in question; in a word, to substitute narrative for argument, expostulation and complaint for dogmatic positions and controversial reasoning, in a writing properly controversial, and of which the aim and design was to support one side of a much agitated question, is a method so intricate, and so unlike the methods pursued by all other impostors, as to require the very flagrant proofs of imposition to induce us to believe it to be one.

Section 2.

CLA_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 5

SECTION 2.

In this section I shall endeavour to prove,—

1. That the Epistle to the Galatians and the Acts of the Apostles were written without any communication with each other.

2. That the epistle, though written without any communication with the history, by recital, implication, or reference, bears testimony to many of the facts contained in it.

1. The epistle and the Acts of the Apostles were written without any communication with each other.

To judge of this point we must examine those passages in each which describe the same transaction; for, if the author of either writing derived his information from the account which he had seen in the other, when he came to speak of the same transaction he would follow that account. The history of St. Paul at Damascus, as read in the Acts, and as referred to by the epistle, forms an instance of this sort. According to the Acts, Paul (after his conversion) was certain days with the “disciples which were at Damascus. And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God. But all that heard him were amazed, and said: Is not this he which destroyed them which called on this name in Jerusalem, and came hither for that intent, that he might bring them bound unto the chief priests? But Saul increased the more in strength, confounding the Jews which were at Damascus, proving that this is very Christ. And after that many days were fulfilled, the Jews took counsel to kill him. But their laying wait was known to Saul; and they watched the gates day and night to kill him. Then the disciples took him by night, and let him down by the wall in a basket. And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples.” Acts 9:19-26.

According to the epistle, “When it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace, to reveal his own Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood; neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus; then, after three years, I went up to Jerusalem.” Besides the difference observable in the terms and general complexion of these two accounts, “the journey into Arabia,” mentioned in the epistle, and omitted in the history, affords full proof that there existed no correspondence between these writers. If the narrative in the Acts had been made up from the epistle, it is impossible that this journey should have been passed over in silence; if the epistle had been composed out of what the author had read of St. Paul’s history in the Acts, it is unaccountable that it should have been inserted.*

*N.B. The Acts of the Apostles simply inform us that St. Paul left Damascus in order to go to Jerusalem, “after many days were fulfilled.” If any one doubt whether the words “many days” could be intended to express a period which included a term of three years, he will find a complete instance of the same phrase, used with the same latitude, in 1 Kings 2:38, 39: “And Shimei dwelt at Jerusalem many days; and it came to pass at the end of three years, that two of the servants of Shimei ran away:’

The journey to Jerusalem related in the second chapter of the epistle (“then, fourteen years after, I went up again to Jerusalem”) supplies another example of the same kind. Either this was the journey described in the fifteenth chapter of the Acts, when Paul and Barnabas were sent from Antioch to Jerusalem, to consult the apostles and elders upon the question of the Gentile converts, or it was some journey of which the history does not take notice. If the first opinion be followed, the discrepancy in the two accounts is so considerable, that it is not without difficulty they can be adapted to the same transaction, so that upon this supposition there is no place for suspecting that the writers were guided or assisted by each other. If the latter opinion be preferred, we have then a journey to Jerusalem, and a conference with the principal members of the Church there, circumstantially related in the epistle, and entirely omitted in the Acts; and we are at liberty to repeat the observation, which we before made, that the omission of the material a fact in the history is inexplicable if the historian had read the epistle, and that the insertion of it in the epistle, if the writer derived his information from the history, is not less so. St. Peter’s visit to Antioch, during which the dispute arose between him and St. Paul, is not mentioned in the Acts.

If we connect with these instances the general observation, that no scrutiny can discover the smallest trace of transcription or imitation, either in things or words, we shall be fully satisfied in this part of our case, namely, that the two records, be the facts contained in them true or false, come to our hands from independent sources,

Secondly, I say that the epistle, thus proved to have been written without any communication with the history, bears testimony to a great variety of particulars contained in the history.

1. St. Paul in the early part of his life had addicted himself to the study of the Jewish religion, and was distinguished by his zeal for the institution and for the traditions which had been incorporated with it. Upon this part of his character the history makes St. Paul speak thus: “I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city of Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous towards God, as ye all are this day.” Acts 22:3.

The epistle is as follows: “I profited in the Jews’ religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.” Galatians 1:14.

2. St. Paul before his conversion had been a fierce persecutor of the new sect. “As for Saul, he made havoc of the Church; entering into every house, and haling men and women, committed them to prison.” Acts 8:3.

This is the history of St. Paul, as delivered in the Acts; in the recital of his own history in the epistle, “Ye have heard,” says he, “of my conversation in times past in the Jews’ religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the Church of God.” Galatians 1:13.

3. St. Paul was miraculously converted on his way to Damascus. “And as he journeyed he came near to Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: and he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus, whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he, trembling and astonished, said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? Acts 9:3-6. With these compare the epistle, Galatians 1:15-17: “When it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace, to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood, neither went I up to Jerusalem, to them that were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.”

In this quotation from the epistle, I desire it to be remarked how incidentally it appears that the affair passed at Damascus. In what may be called the direct part of the account no mention is made of the place of his conversion at all; a casual expression at the end, and an expression brought in for a different purpose, alone fixes it to have been at Damascus: “I returned again to Damascus.” Nothing can be more like simplicity and undesignedness than this is. It also draws the agreement between the two quotations somewhat closer, to observe that they both state St. Paul to have preached the Gospel immediately upon his call: “And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God;” Acts 9:20. “ When it pleased God to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood.” Galatians 1:15-16.

4. The course of the apostle’s travels after his conversion was this: He went from Damascus to Jerusalem, and from Jerusalem into Syria and Cilicia. “At Damascus the disciples took him by night, and let him down by the wall in a basket; and when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples; Acts 9:25-26. Afterwards, “when the brethren knew the conspiracy formed against him at Jerusalem, they brought him down to Cæsarea, and sent him forth to Tarsus, a city in Cilicia;” Acts 9:30. In the epistle St. Paul gives the following brief account of his proceedings within the same period: “After three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days; afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia.” The history had told us that Paul passed from Cæsarea to Tarsus: if he took this journey by land, it would carry him through Syria into Cilicia; and he would come, after his visit at Jerusalem, “into the regions of Syria and Cilicia,” in the very order in which he mentions them in the epistle. This supposition of his going from Cæsarea to Tarsus by land clears up also another point. It accounts for what St. Paul says in the same place concerning the Churches of Judea: “Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia, and was unknown by face unto the Churches of Judea which were in Christ; but they had heard only that he which persecuted us in times past, now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed; and they glorified God in me.” Upon which passage I observe, first, that what is here said of the Churches of Judea is spoken in connection with his journey into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. Secondly, that the passage itself has little significancy, and that the connection is inexplicable, unless St. Paul went through Judea* (though probably by a hasty journey) at the time that he came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. Suppose him to have passed by land from Cæsarea to Tarsus, all this, as hath been observed, would be precisely true. *Dr. Doddridge thought that the Cæsarea here mentioned was not the celebrated city of that name upon the Mediterranean Sea, but Cæsarsa Philippi, near the borders of Syria, which lies in a much more direct line from Jerusalem to Tarsus than the other. The objection to this, Dr. Benson remarks, is, that Cæsarea, without any addition, usually denotes Cæsarea Palestinæ.

5. Barnabas was with St. Paul at Antioch. “Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek Saul; and when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass that a whole year they assembled themselves with the Church;” Acts 11:25, 26. Again, and upon another occasion, “They (Paul and Barnabas) sailed to Antioch; and there they continued a long time with the disciples;” Acts 14:26.

Now what says the epistle? “When Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed; and the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation;” Galatians 2:11, 13.

6. The stated residence of the apostle was at Jerusalem. “At that time there was a great persecution against the Church which was at Jerusalem, and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles;” Acts 8:1. “They (the Christians at Antioch) determined that Paul and Barnabas should go up to Jerusalem, unto the apostles and elders, about this question;” Acts 15:2. With these accounts agrees the declaration in the epistle: “Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me;” Galatians 1:17; for this declaration implies, or rather assumes it to be known, that Jerusalem was the place were the apostles were to be met with.

7. There were at Jerusalem two apostles, or at least two eminent members of the Church, of the name of James. This is directly inferred from the Acts of the Apostles, which in the second verse of the twelfth chapter (Acts 12:2) relates the death of James, the brother of John; and yet in the fifteenth chapter, and in a subsequent part of the history, records a speech delivered by James in the assembly of the apostles and elders. It is also strongly implied by the form of expression used in the epistle: “Other apostles saw I none, save James, the Lord’s brother;” i.e. to distinguish him from James, the brother of John.

To us, who have been long conversant in the Christian history as contained in the Acts of the Apostles, these points are obvious and familiar; nor do we readily apprehend any greater difficulty in making them appear in a letter purporting to have been written by St. Paul, than there is in introducing them into a modern sermon. But to judge correctly of the argument before us, we must discharge this knowledge from our thoughts. We must propose to ourselves the situation of an author who sat down to the writing of the epistle without having seen the history; and then the concurrences we have deduced will he deemed of importance. They will, at least, be taken for separate confirmations of the several facts, and not only of these particular facts, but of the general truth of the history. For what is the rule with respect to corroborative testimony which prevails in courts of justice, and which prevails only because experience has proved that it is a useful guide to truth? A principal witness in a cause delivers his account; his narrative, in certain parts of it, is confirmed by witnesses who are called afterwards. The credit derived from their testimony belongs not only to the particular circumstances in which the auxiliary witnesses agree with the principal witness, but in some measure to the whole of his evidence; because it is improbable that accident or fiction should draw a line which touched upon truth in so many points.

In like manner, if two records be produced, manifestly independent, that is, manifestly written without any participation of intelligence, an agreement between them, even in few and slight circumstances, (especially if from the different nature and design of the writings few points only of agreement, and those incidental, could be expected to occur,) would add a sensible weight to the authority of both, in every part of their contents. The same rule is applicable to history, with at least as much reason as any other species of evidence.

Section 3.

CLA_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 11

SECTION 3.

But although the references to various particulars in the epistle, compared with the direct account of the same particulars in the history, afford a considerable proof of the truth not only of these particulars but of the narrative which contains them; yet they do not show, it will be said, that the epistle was written by St. Paul; for, admitting (what seems to have been proved) that the writer, whoever he was, had no recourse to the Acts of the Apostles; yet many of the facts referred to, such as St. Paul’s miraculous conversion, his change from a virulent persecutor to an indefatigable preacher, his labours among the Gentiles, and his zeal for the liberties of the Gentile Church, were so notorious as to occur readily to the mind of any Christian, who should choose to personate his character and counterfeit his name; it was only to write what every body knew. Now I think that this supposition, viz. that the epistle was composed upon general information, and the general publicity of the facts alluded to, and that the author did no more than weave into his work what the common fame of the Christian Church had reported to his ears, is repelled by the particularity of the recitals and references. This particularity is observable in the following instances, in perusing which I desire the reader to reflect whether they exhibit the language of a man who had nothing but general reputation to proceed upon, or of a man actually speaking of himself and of his own history, and consequently of things concerning which he possessed a clear, intimate, and circumstantial knowledge.

1. The history, in giving an account of St. Paul after his conversion, relates, “that, after many days,” effecting, by the assistance of the disciples, his escape from Damascus, “he proceeded to Jerusalem;” Acts 9:25-26. The epistle, speaking of the same period, makes St. Paul say that he “went into Arabia,” that he returned again to Damascus, that after three years he went up to Jerusalem; Galatians 1:17, 18.

2. The history relates that when Saul was come from Damascus, “he was with the disciples coming in and going out;” Acts 9:28. The epistle, describing the same journey, tells us, “that he went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days;” Galatians 1:18.

3. The history relates that, when Paul was come to Jerusalem, “Barnabas took him and brought him to the apostles;” Acts 9:27. The epistle, “that he saw Peter; but other of the apostles saw he none, save James the Lord’s brother;” Galatians 1:19.

Now this is as it should be. The historian delivers his account in general terms, as of facts to which he was not present. The person who is the subject of that account, when he comes to speak of these facts himself, particularizes time, names, and circumstances.

4. The like notation of places, persons, and dates, is met with in the account of St. Paul’s journey to Jerusalem, given in the second chapter of the epistle. It was fourteen years after his conversion; it was in company with Barnabas and Titus; it was then that he met with James, Cephas, and John; it was then also that it was agreed amongst them that they should go to the circumcision, and he unto the Gentiles.

5. The dispute with Peter, which occupies the sequel of the second chapter, is marked with the same particularity. It was at Antioch; it was after certain came from James; it was whilst Barnabas was there, who was carried away by their dissimulation. These examples negative the insinuation that the epistle presents nothing but indefinite allusions to public facts.

Section 4.

CLA_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 12

SECTION 4.

Galatians 4:11-16: “I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain. Brethren, I beseech you, be as I am, for I am as ye are. Ye have not injured me at all. Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I preached the Gospel unto you at first; and my temptation which was in the flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus. Where is then the blessedness YOU SPAKE OF? for I bear you record, that, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them unto me. Amos I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?”

With this passage compare 2 Corinthians 12:1-9: “It is not expedient for me, doubtless, to glory; I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord. I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell, or whether out of the body, I cannot tell, God knoweth;) such a one was caught up to the third heaven; and I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell, God knoweth,) how that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. Of such a one will I glory, yet of myself will I not glory, but in mine infirmities; for, though I would desire to glory, I shall not be a fool; for I will say the truth. But now I forbear, lest any man should think of me above that which he seeth me to be, or that he heareth of me. And lest I should be exalted above measure, through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure. For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me. And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee; for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.” There can be no doubt that “the temptation which was in the flesh,” mentioned in the Epistle to the Galatians, and “the thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet him,” mentioned in the epistle to the Corinthians, were intended to denote the same thing. Either, therefore, it was, what we pretend it to have been, the same person in both-that is, we are reading the letters of a real apostle; or it was that a sophist, who had seen the circumstance in one epistle, contrived, for the sake of correspondency, to bring it into another; or, lastly, it was a circumstance in St. Paul’s personal condition supposed to be well known to those into whose hands the epistle was likely to fall, and for that reason introduced into a writing designed to bear his name. I have extracted the quotations at length, in order to enable the reader to judge accurately of the manner in which the mention of this particular occurs in each; because that judgment, I think, will acquit the author of the epistle of the charge of having studiously inserted it, either with a view of producing an apparent agreement between them, or for any other purpose whatever. The context, by which the circumstance before us is introduced, is in the two places totally different, and without any mark of imitation; yet in both places does the circumstance rise aptly and naturally out of the context, and that context from the train of thought carried on in the epistle. The Epistle to the Galatians, from the beginning to the end, runs in a strain of angry complaint of their defection from the apostle, and from the principles which he had taught them. It was very natural to contrast with this conduct the zeal with which they had once received him; and it was not less so to mention, as a proof of their former disposition towards him, the indulgence which, whilst he was amongst them, they had shown to his infirmity: “My temptation which was in the flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus. Where is then the blessedness you spake of, i.e. the benedictions which you bestowed upon me? for I bear you record, that, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me.” In the two epistles to the Corinthians, especially in the second, we have the apostle contending with certain teachers in Corinth, who had formed a party in that Church against him. To vindicate his personal authority, as well as the dignity and credit of his ministry amongst them, he takes occasion (but not without apologizing repeatedly for the folly, that is, for the indecorum of pronouncing his own panegyric) to meet his adversaries in their boastings: “Whereinsoever any is bold, (I speak foolishly,) I am bold also. Are they Hebrews? so am I. Are they Israelites? so am I. Are they the seed of Abraham? so am I. Are they the ministers of Christ? (I speak as a fool) I am more; in labours more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent, in deaths oft.” Being led to the subject, he goes on, as was natural, to recount his trials and dangers, his incessant cares and labours in the Christian mission. From the proofs which he had given of his zeal and activity in the service of Christ, he passes (and that with the same view of establishing his claim to be considered as “not a whit behind the very chiefest of the apostles”) to the visions and revelations which from time to time had been vouchsafed to him. And then, by a close and easy connection, comes in the mention of his infirmity: “Lest I should be exalted,” says he, “above measure, through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me.”

Thus, then, in both epistles the notice of his infirmity is suited to the place in which it is found. In the epistle to the Corinthians the train of thought draws up the circumstance by a regular approximation; in this epistle it is suggested by the subject and occasion of the epistle itself. Which observation we offer as an argument to prove that it is not, in either epistle, a circumstance industriously brought forward for the sake of procuring credit to an imposture.

A reader will be taught to perceive the force of this argument, who shall attempt to introduce a given circumstance into the body of a writing. To do this without abruptness, or without betraying marks of design in the transition, requires, he will find, more art than he expected to be necessary; certainly more than any one can believe to have been exercised in the composition of these epistles.

Section 5.

CLA_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 15

SECTION 5.

Galatians 4:29: “But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.” Galatians 5:11: “And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? Then is the offence of the cross ceased.” Galatians 6:17: “From henceforth let no man trouble me, for I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.”

From these several texts it is apparent that the persecutions which our apostle had undergone were from the hands or by the instigation of the Jews; that it was not for preaching Christianity in opposition to heathenism, but it was for preaching it as distinct from Judaism, that he had brought upon himself the sufferings which had attended his ministry. And this representation perfectly coincides with that which results from the detail of St. Paul’s history as delivered in the Acts. At Antioch, in Pisidia, the “word of the Lord was published throughout all the region; but the Jews stirred up the devout and honourable women and the chief men of the city, and raised persecution against Paul and Barnabas, and expelled them out of their coasts.” (Acts 13:50.) Not long after, at Iconium, “a great multitude of the Jews and also of the Greeks believed; but the unbelieving Jews stirred up the Gentiles, and made their minds evil affected against the brethren.” (Acts 14:1, 2.) “At Lystra there came certain Jews from Antioch and Iconium, who persuaded the people; and having stoned Paul, drew him out of the city, supposing he had been dead.” (Acts 14:19.) The same enmity, and from the same quarter, our apostle experienced in Greece: “At Thessalonica, some of them (the Jews) believed, and consorted with Paul and Silas; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women not a few: but the Jews which believed not, moved with envy, took unto them certain lewd fellows of the baser sort, and gathered a company, and set all the city in an uproar, and assaulted the house of Jason, and sought to bring them out to the people.” (Acts 17:4, 5.) Their persecutors follow them to Berea: “When the Jews of Thessalonica had knowledge that the word of God was preached of Paul at Berea, they came hither also, and stirred up the people.” (Acts 17:13.) And, lastly, at Corinth, when Gallio was deputy of Achaia, “the Jews made insurrection with one accord against Paul, and brought him to the judgment seat.” I think it does not appear that our apostle was ever set upon by the Gentiles, unless they were first stirred up by the Jews, except in two instances; in both which the persons who began the assault were immediately interested in his expulsion from the place. Once this happened at Philippi, after the cure of the Pythoness: “When the masters saw the hope of their gains was gone, they caught Paul and Silas, and drew them into the market-place unto the rulers.” (Acts 16:19.) And a second time at Ephesus, at the instance of Demetrius, a silversmith, who made silver shrines for Diana, “who called together workmen of like occupation, and said, Sirs, ye know that by this craft we have our wealth; moreover ye see and hear that not only at Ephesus, but almost throughout all Asia, this Paul hath persuaded away much people, saying, that they be no gods which are made with hands; so that not only this our craft is in danger to be set at nought, but also that the temple of the great goddess Diana should be despised, and her magnificence should be destroyed, whom all Asia and the world worshippeth.”

Section 6.

CLA_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 16

SECTION 6.

I observe an agreement in a somewhat peculiar rule of Christian conduct as laid down in this epistle, and as exemplified in the Second Epistle to the Corinthians. It is not the repetition of the same general precept, which would have been a coincidence of little value; but it is the general precept in one place, and the application of that precept to an actual occurrence in the other. In the sixth chapter and first verse of this epistle, {Galatians 6:1} our apostle gives the following direction: “Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such a one in the spirit of meekness.” In 2 Corinthians 2:6-8, he writes thus: “Sufficient to such a man (the incestuous person mentioned in the first epistle) is this punishment, which was inflicted of many; so that, contrariwise, ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with over-much sorrow.”

Section 7.

CLA_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 17

SECTION 7.

This epistle goes farther than any of St. Paul’s epistles, for it avows in direct terms the supersession of the Jewish law as an instrument of salvation, even to the Jews themselves. Not only were the Gentiles exempt from its authority, but even the Jews were no longer either to place any dependence upon it, or consider themselves as subject to it on a religious account. “Before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed: wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith; but, after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster; Galatians 3:23-25. This was undoubtedly spoken of Jews, and to Jews. In like manner, Galatians 4:1-5: “Now I say that the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all; but is under tutors and governors, until the time appointed of the father: even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world; but when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.” These passages are nothing short of a declaration, that the obligation of the Jewish law, considered as a religious dispensation, the effects of which were to take place in another life, had ceased, with respect even to the Jews themselves. What then should be the conduct of a Jew (for such St. Paul was) who preached this doctrine? To be consistent with himself, either he would no longer comply, in his own person, with the directions of the law; or, if he did comply, it would be for some other reason than any confidence which he placed in its efficacy, as a religious institution. Now so it happens, that, whenever St. Paul’s compliance with the Jewish law is mentioned in the history, it is mentioned in connection with circumstances which point out the motive from which it proceeded; and this motive appears to have been always exoteric, namely, a love of order and tranquillity, or an unwillingness to give unnecessary offence. Thus, Acts 16:3: “Him (Timothy) would Paul have to go forth with him, and took and circumcised him, because of the Jew’s which were in those quarters.” Again, Acts 21:26, when Paul consented to exhibit an example of public compliance with a Jewish rite, by purifying himself in the temple, it is plainly intimated that he did this to satisfy “many thousands of Jews, who believed, and who were all zealous of the law.” So far the instances related in one book correspond with the doctrine delivered in another.

Section 8.

CLA_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 18

SECTION 8.

Galatians 1:18: “Then, after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.”

The shortness of St. Paul’s stay at Jerusalem is what I desire the reader to remark. The direct account of the same journey in the Acts, Acts 9:28, determines nothing concerning the time of his continuance there: “And he was with them (the apostles) coming in and going out, at Jerusalem; and he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus, and disputed against the Grecians: but they went about to slay him; which when the brethren knew, they brought him down to Cæsarea.” Or rather, this account, taken by itself would lead a reader to suppose that St. Paul’s abode at Jerusalem had been longer than fifteen days. But turn to the twenty-second chapter of the Acts, {Acts 22:17, 18} and you will find a reference to this visit to Jerusalem, which plainly indicates that Paul’s continuance in that city had been of short duration: “And it came to pass, that when I was come again to Jerusalem, even while I prayed in the temple, I was in a trance, and saw him saying unto me, Make haste, get thee quickly out of Jerusalem, for they will not receive thy testimony concerning me.” Here we have the general terms of one text so explained by a distinct text in the same book, as to bring an indeterminate expression into a close conformity with a specification delivered in another book-a species of consistency not, I think, usually found in fabulous relations.

Section 9.

CLA_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 18

SECTION 9.

Galatians 6:11: “Ye see how large a letter I have written unto you with mine own hand.”

These words imply that he did not always write with his own hand; which is consonant to what we find intimated in some other of the epistles. The Epistle to the Romans was written by Tertius: “I, Tertius, who wrote this epistle, salute you in the Lord;” Romans 16:22. The First Epistle to the Corinthians, the Epistle to the Colossians, and the second to the Thessalonians, have all, near the conclusion, this clause: “The salutation of me, Paul, with mine own hand; which must be understood, and is universally understood, to import that the rest of the epistle was written by another hand. I do not think it improbable that an impostor, who had marked this subscription in some other epistle, should invent the same in a forgery; but that is not done here. The author of this epistle does not imitate the manner of giving St. Paul’s signature; he only bids the Galatians observe how large a letter he had written to them with his own hand. He does not say this was different from his ordinary usage; that is left to implication. Now, to suppose that this was an artifice to procure credit to an imposture, is to suppose that the author of the forgery, because he knew that others of St. Paul’s were not written by himself, therefore made the apostle say that this was; which seems an odd turn to give to the circumstance, and to be given for a purpose which would more naturally and more directly have been answered, by subjoining the salutation or signature in the form in which it is found in other epistles.

Section 10.

CLA_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 19

SECTION 10.

An exact conformity appears in the manner in which a certain apostle or eminent Christian, whose name was James, is spoken of in the epistle and in the history. Both writings refer to a situation of his at Jerusalem, somewhat different from that of the other apostles-a kind of eminence or presidency in the Church there, or, at least, a more fixed and stationary residence. Galatians 2:12: “When Peter was at Antioch, before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles.” This text plainly attributes a kind of pre-eminence to James; and as we hear of him twice in the same epistle dwelling at Jerusalem, Galatians 1:19; 2:9, we must apply it to the situation which he held in that Church. In the Acts of the Apostles divers intimations occur, conveying the same idea of James’s situation. When Peter was miraculously delivered from prison, and had surprised his friends by his appearance among them, after declaring unto them how the Lord had brought him out of prison, “Go, show,” says he, “these things unto James, and to the brethren;” Acts 12:17. Here James is manifestly spoken of in terms of distinction. He appears again with like distinction in the twenty-first chapter and the seventeenth and eighteenth verses: {Acts 21:17, 18} “And when we (Paul and his company) were come to Jerusalem, the day following Paul went in with us unto James, and all the elders were present.” In the debate which took place upon the business of the Gentile converts, in the council at Jerusalem, this same person seems to have taken the lead. It was he who closed the debate, and proposed the resolution in which the council ultimately concurred: “Wherefore my sentence is, &c.”

Upon the whole, that there exists a conformity in the expressions used concerning James, throughout the history and in the epistle, is unquestionable. This proves that the circumstance itself is founded in truth; viz. that James was a real person, who held a situation of eminence in a real society of Christians at Jerusalem. It confirms also those parts of the narrative which are connected with this circumstance. Suppose, for instance, the truth of the account of Peter’s escape from prison was to be tried upon the testimony of a witness who, among other things, made Peter, after his deliverance, say, “Go, show these things to James and to the brethren;” would it not be material, in such a trial, to make out by other independent proofs, or by a comparison of proofs, drawn from independent sources, that there was actually at that time, living at Jerusalem, such a person as James; that this person held such a situation in the society amongst whom these things were transacted as to render the words which Peter is said to have used concerning him proper and natural? If this would be pertinent in the discussion of oral testimony, it is still more so in appreciating the credit of remote history.

Preface to the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Galatians.

CLA_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 21

PREFACE TO THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE

APOSTLE TO THE GALATIANS.

GALATIA was anciently a part of Phrygia and the neighbouring countries. It had its name from the Gauls, who, having in several bodies invaded Asia Minor, as Pausanius (Attic., cap. iv.) relates, conquered this country and settled in it. As these were mixed with various Grecian families, the country was also called Gallogræcia, see Justin, lib. xxiv. 4; xxv. 2; xxvii. 3; xxviii. 3; and Strabo, xiv. Under the reign of Augustus Cæsar, about the year of Rome 727, and 26 years before our Lord, it was reduced into the form of a Roman colony, and was governed by a proprætor, appointed by the emperor.

This country is bounded on the east by Cappadocia; on the west by Bithynia; on the south by Pamphylia; and on the north by the Euxine Sea. These are its limits according to Strabo, which some think too extensive; but the different provinces of Asia Minor being the subjects of continual contentions and inroads, very frequently changed their boundaries as well as their masters, and were seldom at one stay.

The Galatæ were divided into three tribes, the Tectosages, the Trocmi, and the Tolistobogi. According to Pliny their country was divided into 195 tetrarchies, and, according to Strabo, each of the three divisions above mentioned was subdivided into four cantons, each of which had a tetrarch; and besides these twelve tetrarchs, there was a general council of the nation, consisting of 300 senators. These tetrarchs were at last reduced in number to three, then to two, and lastly to one; the last tetrarch and king of Galatia was Amyntas, who, from being secretary to Dejotarus, the first person that possessed the whole tetrarchy, was made king of Pisidia in the year of Rome 714. And in the year 718, Mark Antony made him tetrarch of Galatia. After the death of Amyntas, Galatia was ranked by Augustus among the Roman provinces, and governed as aforesaid. The administration of the proprætors continued till the reign of Theodosius the Great, or Valens; and, under the Christian emperors, it was divided into two provinces, Galatia prima being subject to a consul; Galatia secunda, or salutaris, governed by a president.

The religion of the ancient Galatæ was extremely corrupt and superstitious; and they are said to have worshipped the mother of the gods under the name of Agdistis, and to have offered human sacrifices of the prisoners they took in war.

They are mentioned by historians as a tall and valiant people, who went nearly naked; and used for arms only a sword and buckler. The impetuosity of their attack is stated to have been irresistible; and this generally made them victorious.

It appears, from the Acts of the Apostles, that St. Paul visited this country more than once. Two visits to this region are particularly marked in the Acts, viz. the first about A. D. 53, Acts 16:6: “Now when they had gone through Phrygia and the region of Galatia,” &c.; the second about A. D. 56, Acts 18:23: “He went over all the country of Galatia and Phrygia in order, strengthening all the disciples.”

St. Paul was probably the first who had preached the Gospel in this region, as appears pretty evident from Galatians 1:6: “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that CALLED YOU INTO THE GRACE OF CHRIST;” and from Galatians 4:13: “Ye know how, through infirmity of the flesh, I preached the Gospel unto you at the first.” Others suppose that it is not unlikely that St. Peter had preached the Gospel there to the Jews or Helenists only, as his first epistle is directed “to the strangers who were scattered abroad throughout Pontus, GALATIA, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia;” and it is supposed, also, that the persons converted by St. Peter probably occasioned those differences among the Galatian converts, which induced St. Paul to write this epistle, in which he takes pains to establish his own character as an apostle, which had been disputed by some, with a view of placing him below Peter, who preached generally to the Jews only, and observed the law. See Calmet and the New Encyclopedia, article GALATIA. That St. Peter thought at first that the Gospel should be confined to the Jews is sufficiently evident from the Acts of the Apostles; but after his Divine vision, which happened about A. D. 41, related Acts 10, he saw that God had also called the Gentiles into the Church; and his first epistle, which was written in A. D. 64, was probably twelve years posterior to that written by St. Paul to the Galatians.

As to the precise time in which this epistle was written, there have been various opinions among learned men. Some of the ancients believed it to be the very first written of all St. Paul’s epistles. See Epiphanius, tom. i., Hæres. 42. Others have supposed that it was written after his second journey to Galatia, Acts 18:23, which in the chronology I have placed in A. D. 54; and others, with more probability, after his first journey, see Acts 16:6, which in the chronology I have placed in A. D. 53. That it was written soon after one of the apostle’s visits to that region seems evident from the following complaint: “I marvel that ye are so SOON removed from him that hath called you,” Galatians 1:6; it has been therefore conjectured that only one or two years had elapsed from that time, and that the epistle must have been written about A. D. 52 or 53. Beausobre and L’Enfant speak very judiciously on this subject: “We do not find in the Epistle to the Galatians any mark that can enable us to determine with certainty at what time or in what place it was written. It is dated at Rome in some printed copies and MSS., but there is nothing in the epistle itself to confirm this date. Paul does not here make any mention of his bonds, as he does in all his epistles written from Rome. He says, indeed, Galatians 6:17: ‘I bear about in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus;’ but he had often suffered before he came to Rome. Some learned chronologers think that it was written between the third and fourth journey of St. Paul to Jerusalem, and between his first and second into Galatia; which opinion appears very probable; for, since the apostle says, he wonders that they were so soon turned to another gospel, this epistle must have been written a short time after he had preached in Galatia. “Nor can we discern in the epistle any notice of the second journey which St. Paul made into this country. For this reason it is thought that the Epistle to the Galatians was written at Corinth, where the apostle made a long stay, or else in some city of Asia, particularly Ephesus, where he stayed some days on his way to Jerusalem, Acts 18:19-21; therefore, in all probability the epistle was written from Corinth, or from Ephesus, in the year 52 or 53.” Dr. Lardner confirms this opinion by the following considerations:—

1. St. Paul says to the Corinthians, 1 Corinthians 16:1: “Now, concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given orders to the Churches of Galatia, so do ye;” which shows that at the writing of that epistle to the Corinthians, in 56, he had a good opinion of his converts in Galatia; and that he had no doubt of their respect to his directions, which probably had been sent to them from Ephesus during his long abode there.

2. And now we shall be better able to account for what appears very remarkable: when Paul left Corinth, after his long stay there, he went to Jerusalem, having a vow; in his way he came to Ephesus, Acts 18:10-21: “And when they desired him to tarry longer with them, he consented not, but bade them farewell saying, I must by all means keep this feast that cometh at Jerusalem; but I will return unto you again, if God will.” When we read this, we might be apt to think that Paul should hasten back to Ephesus and return thither presently, after he had been at Jerusalem; but instead of doing so, after he had been at Jerusalem, he went down to Antioch; “And after he had spent some time there he departed, and went over all the country of Galatia and Phrygia in order, strengthening the disciples,” Acts 18:22, 23. We now seem to see the reason of this course. At Corinth he heard of the defection of many in Galatia, whereupon he sent a sharp letter to them; but, considering the nature of the case, he judged it best to take the first opportunity to go to Galatia, and support the instructions of his letter; and both together had a good effect. Galatians 4:19, 20: “My little children, of whom I travail in birth again-I desire to be present with you, and to change my voice; for I stand in doubt of you;” or, I am perplexed for you. Now, then, we see the reason of the apostle’s not coming directly from Jerusalem to Ephesus. However, he was not unmindful of his promise, and came thither after he had been in Galatia.

3. Upon the whole, the Epistle to the Galatians is an early epistle, and, as seems to me most probable, was written at Corinth near the end of A. D. 52, or the very beginning of 53, before St. Paul set out to go to Jerusalem by the way of Ephesus.

But if any should rather think that it was written at Ephesus, during the apostle’s short stay there, on his way from Corinth to Jerusalem, that will make but very little difference; for still, according to our computation, the epistle was written at the beginning of the year 53. See Lardner’s Works, vol. vi., page 309.

Every thing considered, I feel no hesitation to place this epistle in the 52d or 53d year of our Lord; either the end of the former or the beginning of the latter.

From the complexion of this epistle it appears to have been written to the Jews who were dispersed in Galatia; see Acts 2:9. And although in Galatians 4:8, it is said that the persons to whom the apostle writes did not know God, and did service to them which by nature were no gods; this must be understood of those who had been proselytes to the Jewish religion, as Galatians 4:9 sufficiently shows; for, after they had been converted to Christianity, they turned AGAIN to the weak and beggarly elements.

These Galatians were doubtless converted by St. Paul; see Acts 16:6; 18:23; but, after his departure from them, some teachers had got in among them who endeavoured to persuade them, and successfully too, that they should be circumcised and keep the Mosaic law. See Galatians 1:6; 4:9, 10, 21; 5:1, 2; 6:12. And the apostle labours to bring them back from the errors of these false teachers.

The arguments which the apostle uses to prove the truth of the Christian religion, as well as the nullity of the Mosaic institutions, are the following:—

1. That himself, immediately after his conversion, without having any conference with any of the apostles, preached the pure doctrines of Christianity doctrines strictly conformable to those preached by the genuine disciples of the Lord; and this was a proof that he had received them by immediate inspiration, as he could have known them no other way.

2. That he was led to oppose Peter because he had withdrawn himself from communion with the converted Gentiles, and thereby gave occasion to some to suppose that he considered the law as still binding on those who believed; and that the Gentiles were not to be admitted to an equality of religious privileges with the Jews.

3. That no rites or ceremonies of the Jewish law could avail any thing in the justification of a sinner; and that faith in Christ was the only means of justification.

4. That their own works could avail nothing towards their justification:—

(1.) For the Spirit of God was given them in consequence of receiving the Christian doctrine, Galatians 3:2-5.

(2.) That the works of the law cannot justify, because Abraham was justified by faith long before the law of Moses was given, Galatians 3:6, 7.

(3.) That the curse of the law, under which every sinner lives, is not removed but by the sacrifice of Christ, Galatians 3:8, 9.

5. That it is absurd for the sons of God to become slaves to Mosaic rites and ceremonies.

The rest of the epistle is of a practical nature. Although subjects of this kind may be gathered out of the epistle, yet it is very evident that the apostle himself has observed no technical division or arrangement of his matter; his chief design being, 1. To vindicate his own apostleship, and to show that he was not inferior to Peter himself, whom their false teachers appear to have set up in opposition to St. Paul. 2. To assert and maintain justification by faith in opposition to all Judaizing teachers. 3. To call them back to the liberty of the Gospel, from which, and its privileges, they had shamelessly apostatized. And, 4. To admonish and exhort them to walk worthy of their vocation, by devoting themselves to the glory of God and the benefit of their brethren. Lastly, he asserts his own determination to be faithful, and concludes with his apostolical benediction. THE EPISTLE OF PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE GALATIANS.

Chronological Notes relative to this Epistle.

-Usherian year of the world, 4056.

-Alexandrian era of the world, 5554.

-Antiochian era of the world, 5544.

-Constantinopolitan era of the world, 5560.

-Year of the Eusebian epocha of the Creation, 4280.

-Year of the Julian period, 4762.

-Year of the minor Jewish era of the world, 3812.

-Year of the greater Rabbinical era of the world, 4411.

-Year from the Flood, according to Archbishop Usher, and the English Bible, 2400.

-Year of the Cali yuga, or Indian era of the Deluge, 3154. -Year of the era of Iphitus, or since the first commencement of the Olympic games, 992.

-Year of the Nabonassarean era, 799.

-Year of the era of the Seleucidæ, 364.

-Year of the Spanish era, 90.

-Year of the Actiac or Actian era, 83.

-Year of the vulgar era of Christ’s nativity, 52.

-Year from the building of Rome, according to Varro, 805. -Year of the CCVIIth Olympiad, 4.

-Year of Ananias, high priest of the Jews, 8.

-Common Golden Number, 15.

-Jewish Golden Number, 12.

-Year of the Solar Cycle, 5.

-Dominical Letters; it being Bissextile or Leap year, BA. -Jewish Passover, April lst.

-Easter Sunday, April 2d.

-Epact, or the moon’s age on the 22d of March, or the Xth of the Calends of April, 4.

-Year of the reign of Claudius Cæsar, the fifth emperor of the Romans, 12. -In the last year of Ventidius Cumanus, governor of the Jews. -Year of Vologesus, king of the Parthians, 2.

-Year of Cains Numidius Quadratus, governor of Syria, 1.

-Roman Consuls; Publius Cornelius Sylla Faustus, and Lucius Salvius Otho Titianus; and for the following year, viz. A. D. 53, (which is supposed by some to be the date of the epistle,) Decimus Junius Silanus, and Quintus Haterius Antoninus.

Preface

BEN_VOL8.PDF, source PDF p. 97

EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS.

PREFACE

The epistle was written, not as most of St. Paul’s epistles are, to the Christians of a particular city, but to those of a whole country, called Galatians, as being the descendants of those Gauls who, finding their own country too strait for them, left it, after the death of Alexander the Great, in quest of new settlements. A body of these, proceeding eastward along the Danube, entered Thrace, and passed over the Bosphorus into the Lesser Asia; in the middle of which they settled, namely, in a country given them by Nicomedes, king of Bithynia, in reward of their assisting him to subdue his brother Zipetes, with whom he was at war. This country, afterward called from them, “Gallo-Græcia,” or “Galatia,” was bounded on the west by Phrygia, on the north by Paphlagonia, on the east by the river Halys, and on the south by Lycaonia. It anciently contained twenty-two noted cities, the principal of which was Ancyra. About A.M. 3824 the Romans ravaged Galatia, and about A.D. 25 it was reduced, with some places adjacent, into a Roman province. The inland situation of this country preventing its inhabitants from having much intercourse with more civilized nations, the Gauls, who settled in it, continued long a rude and illiterate people, speaking the language of the country from whence they came. So Jerome, who lived six hundred years after that people settled themselves in Asia, informs us; observing, that in his time the language of the Galatians was the same with that which he had heard spoken when he was at Treves, or Triers.

It is probable the gospel was first introduced into Galatia by Paul, and that about A.D. 53; (see Acts 16:6;) when passing through that country, he was received with great affection by the inhabitants thereof, and made the instrument of converting many of them from heathenism to Christianity, and of planting several churches among them, called, in the inscription of this letter, the “churches of Galatia.” These churches, when he visited those parts again in his next progress, about A.D. 56, he had an opportunity of confirming in the doctrine he had before taught them, Acts 18:23; Galatians 4:13-15. But, from the contents of this epistle, it appears that not long after he had preached the gospel with such success to them, and had left them, certain Judaizing zealots came among them, and, like those mentioned Acts 15., taught that it was necessary they should be circumcised, and should observe the whole ritual law of Moses, in order to their salvation. What these false teachers seem to have chiefly aimed at was to draw the Galatian believers from the truth as it is in Jesus, with respect to the great doctrine of justification, which they grossly perverted. And the better to accomplish their design, they did all they could to lessen the character and reputation of St. Paul as an apostle, and to raise theirs on the ruins of his; representing him as one who, if he was to be acknowledged as an apostle, yet was much inferior to the others, and particularly to Peter, James, and John, whose followers, it is likely, they pretended to be; and who, they affirmed, inculcated the necessity of circumcision, and the observance of the Mosaic ceremonies as they did; nay, and that St. Paul himself sometimes both practised and recommended these rites, though at other times he opposed them.

The first part, therefore, of this epistle is employed by the apostle in vindicating himself and his doctrine; proving, 1. That he had it immediately from Christ himself, and that he was not inferior to the other apostles; 2. That it. was the very same which the other apostles preached; and, 3. That his practice was consistent with his doctrine. In the second part he produces proofs from the Old Testament, that the law and all its ceremonies were abolished by Christ. The third part contains practical inferences, closed with his usual benediction. To be a little more particular: the epistle contains, I. The inscription, Galatians 1:1-5. II. The calling of the Galatians back to the true gospel; wherein he, 1. Reproves them for leaving it, verses 6-10. 2. Asserts the authority of the gospel he had preached, who of a persecutor was made an apostle by an immediate call from Heaven; (verses 11-17;) and was no way inferior to Peter himself, verse 18 — Galatians 2:21. 3. He defends justification by faith, and again reproves the Galatians, Galatians 3:1 — 4:11. 4. Explains the same things by an allegory, taken out of the law itself, verses 12-31. 5. Exhorts them to maintain their liberty; (Galatians 5:1-12;) warns them not to abuse it, and admonishes them to walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit, verses 13 — Galatians 6:10. III. The conclusion, verses 11- 18.

As to the time when this epistle was written, we may infer from chap. 1:6, where the apostle expresses to the Galatians his concern and wonder that they were so soon perverted from the doctrine he had preached, that it must have been written not long after he had been among them; and as no hint is given, through the whole of it, that when he wrote it he had been with them more than once, it is most reasonable to conclude that it was written before his second journey to Galatia, mentioned Acts 18:23, and consequently not later than A.D. 56.

St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians.

SUT_VOL5.PDF, source PDF p. 49

ST. PAUL’S EPISTLE TO THE

GALATIANS.

SACRED criticism has contemplated every circumstance of time and place, in regard to the writing of this epistle, and weighed every expression in the text; yet much obscurity remains. The expression in Galatians 1:6, “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel,” is thought not to refer to the departure of Paul from Galatia, but to some short space after the arrival of the false apostles, who had endeavoured to subvert the liberty of the gospel by the yoke of the ceremonial law.

This epistle was written in Greek, and it would seem, from Galatians 6:11, with the apostle’s own hand. The Arabic and the Syriac versions add, that it was sent from Rome by Timothy; but as Paul’s bonds are not named, that assertion is not proved, though it might be correct. But as there were “brethren” with the apostle when he wrote, ministers of Christ, he must have written from some great city.

The internal characters of this epistle correspond with the divine authority of the christian religion; that the gospel which Paul had preached in the province was not of men, nor by man, but was delivered to him by immediate revelation.

The second argument is, that the churches of Galatia did not receive the Spirit by the works of the law, but by the hearing of faith; the Holy Ghost having fallen upon them, as in other instances, while the gospel was preached. By this divine influence they had been converted, made the children of God, and Christ was formed in their hearts the hope of glory. The third argument is, that the false apostles, and others, who seduced them were designing men. They did not themselves keep the law, but enforced circumcision, with other rituals, that they might glory in their flesh.

The whole character of the epistle is sanative, associating the liberty of the gospel, with liberation from fleshly desires, which war against the soul. It exhibits the church as adorned with all the fruits of the Spirit, its members being made new creatures in Christ Jesus.

Introduction

WHD_CO13.PDF, source PDF p. 289

GALATIANS

INTRODUCTION

THE first syllable of the word Galatians is identical with Gaul, an old name of France; and, indeed, with Gallic, Gaelic, Welch, (old Guallic and Wallic,) as well as with Celtic. It is the name of that great, brilliant, and brave, but fickle race, which, once occupying Central Europe, was driven westward by the great Germanic tide pouring in from Asia; and which, gradually receding from the face of its invaders towards the Atlantic, now remains upon the western margin of Europe, as the French, Welch, Scotch, and Irish peoples. The epistle to the Galatians was therefore an epistle to the Celts.

The Galatian tribe of this epistle, impelled by the revolutions of war in the early ages, was settled in Asia Minor, like a lonely bowlder, amid surrounding tribes of Phrygian aborigines. As late as the time of Jerome, (fourth century A.D.,) an Asiatic Galatian and a European Celt could have understood each other’s language. These Galatians were a victorious people in their Asiatic region until the year 125 B.C., when they were subjected by the Roman power, yet allowed to retain their previous form of government; and 25 years B.C. they were completely reduced to the condition of a Roman province.

The old Phrygian pagans here were worshippers of Cybele, and their priests practised rites severer than circumcision. There was also a large population of Jews, who engaged in trade and acquired wealth and influence. The Jews were in favour with the Roman Government, and not only made many proselytes, but infused a mitigating influence into surrounding paganism. Over all this mixture of populations the Romans, few yet predominant, held sway, and the Greek language was the prevalent medium of intercourse.

But incidental accounts remain of St. Paul’s first preaching and founding Churches in Galatia. His first visit, in his second missionary tour, is slightly mentioned in Acts 16:6; and his second, in his third tour, is mentioned as slightly in Acts 18:23. Yet the Galatian Churches must have been founded at the first, and “confirmed” at the second, of these two visits. It was soon after the Apostolic Council at Jerusalem that Paul, accompanied by Silas, in a visitation circuit among his old Churches in Syria and Cilicia, diverged into Galatia. Here he was detained by that “weakness of the flesh,” his “thorn,” longer than he purposed. But he was received by the enthusiastic Celts as the angel of God. He pictured the crucified Saviour so vividly that he seemed “visibly set forth among” them. He doubtless at this time visited Ancyra, (the modern Angora,) the central capital of Galatia; Pessinus, seat of the worship of Cybele; and Gordium, where, in an earlier age, Alexander “cut,” because he could not untie, “the Gordian knot.” The Churches here founded occupied, as the epistle shows, a deep place in the apostle’s heart.

About three years after (third missionary tour) occurred the second visit, above mentioned. “He went through the district in order, confirming the Churches.” At that visit, some symptoms of wavering from the Pauline gospel of freedom seem to have presented themselves. Galatians 1:9, and 5:21. It was some three or four years after this second visit, when Paul received, at Corinth, news of tendencies to apostasy which drew forth this present epistle. Note Acts 20:3. It was an apostasy from universal Christianity to a Judaized Christianity, under the dogma, except ye be circumcised and keep the law of Moses ye cannot be saved. Ye cannot be Christians without being also Jews.

Of the state of opinions and parties on this question we have given a concise view in our note to Acts 15:6. See notes also on Acts 6:1. The story of the Judaizing troublers who came to Gentile Antioch, as from James of Jerusalem, proclaiming salvation by circumcision, was repeated in Gentile Galatia. These Celts came under the power of this Jewish influence. Leading Christian Judaists came from Jerusalem, armed with metropolitan authority, to tell these Galatian Churches that their founder-apostle was a spurious apostle, and their Christianity a defective Christianity, which would not save them. The severe rite of circumcision was condition to salvation; and adherence to Jerusalem and a gorgeous ritual were necessary to a complete Church. Paul’s naked doctrine of justification before God solely by faith in Christ was a doctrine of apostasy. Under these powerful influences the impressible Galatian Churches were yielding and ready to fall. Unable to go himself, from distant Corinth Paul sent this letter to their rescue.

Of the immediate effect of the epistle we have no definite account. We only know that in later ages a very fervent and often fanatical Christianity prevailed. Judaistic Christianity, which, in Paul’s day, aspired to control the Church, everywhere waned, and, in the destruction of Jerusalem, A.D. 70, received a fatal blow. Very faint traces remained of its existence in the third century.

The epistle to the Galatians has ever been a stronghold of evangelical Protestantism against Romanism and ritualism. The same principle of salvation by faith, asserted by St. Paul against Judaic ritual, is equally good against every kind of oppressive formalism. It asserts the life and power as over and against the form. It centres true religion in the heart, and makes all externals to be either the outflow therefrom, or the proper aids to such an outcome. Hence it was the favourite epistle of Luther. “The Epistle to the Galatians,” says he, “is my epistle; I have betrothed myself to it; it is my wife.” He wrote three successive commentaries upon it. Meyer says, in his preface, (early German edition,) that Luther, as Bible-commentator, stands far below Luther the Bible-translator. It was during a reading of Luther on Romans that Wesley’s heart was “strangely warmed,” and he first attained full consciousness of saving faith, which he then considered his “conversion.” But Luther on Galatians was for but a brief period a favourite with Wesley. Its ultraism in stating the doctrine of justification by faith led too palpably to Antinomianism. Two years after his “conversion” (1741) he says: “I read over Martin Luther’s comment on the Epistle to the Galatians. I was utterly ashamed. How have I esteemed this book… how blasphemously does he speak of good works, and of the law of God! Here (I apprehend) is the real spring of the grand error of the Moravians. They follow Luther for better or for worse.” He then “began to expound the Epistle of St. James, the great antidote against this poison.” Both epistles bring out the great principle, that if we are justified by faith, our faith must be justified by works; but that in truth we are literally justified by Christ, through a faith in him that works by love and purifies the heart. The Christian defender has no trouble in maintaining the genuineness of Galatians. The most adverse scholarly criticism, as that of Baur and Renan, admits that four epistles, namely, Romans, First and Second Corinthians, and Galatians, are the productions of St. Paul. The epistle is divisible into three parts:—

Outline

WHD_CO13.PDF, source PDF p. 292

OUTLINE

PART FIRST.

St. Paul’s Apostleship Historically Sustained Galatians 1:6-2:21

1. The points stated: Paul’s apostleship and Christian justification Galatians 1:6-10

2. Paul’s gospel derived from no other apostle Galatians 1:11-24

3. His apostleship conceded by the after apostles—The Council of Jerusalem Galatians 2:1-10

4. Paul’s apostolic rebuke of the apostle Peter Galatians 2:11-21 PART SECOND.

Biblical Establishment of Faith—Justification through Christ Galatians 3:1-4:31

1. Introductory expostulation against their apostasy from faith to works Galatians 3:1-4

2. The Abrahamic faith-covenant—which is identical with the Christian faith-covenant—superior to law, working the curse Galatians 3:5-14

3. This identity of the Abrahamic and Christian faith-covenant, not broken by the Mosaic interval of law Galatians 3:15-18

4. Real purpose of the law—to advance us to Christ and blessedness Galatians 3:19-29

5. This advancement compared to the development of childhood into manhood Galatians 4:1-8

6. Consequent folly of their relapse into old legalism Galatians 4:9-20

7. Superiority of faith over legalism illustrated by history of Sarah and Hagar Galatians 4:21-5:1

PART THIRD.

Exhortation to Steadfastness in Gospel Freedom and to Faithfulness in Christian Duty Galatians 5:2-6:18

1. Admonitory warnings to maintain their freedom from legalism Galatians 5:2-12

2. But this freedom must not pass into license Galatians 5:13-26

3. Mutual and common church communion Galatians 6:1-10 a. Mutual meek reproof Galatians 6:1-5

b. Mutual co-operation of teacher and church Galatians 6:6-10 c. Autograph and benediction Galatians 6:11-18

Preface

BEET_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 3

GALATIANS

PREFACE

THIS volume completes my exposition of the second and largest group of St. Paul’s Epistles, viz. those of his Third Missionary Journey. Written as they were probably within the space of one year, these Epistles are closely related. And, fortunately, of St. Paul’s movements during this year we have a partial narrative from the pen of one who at the close of the year was himself a travelling companion of the Apostle. The combined light shed by these four Epistles and by the Book of Acts makes St. Paul’s inner and outer life better known to us during this year than at any other time. We are thus enabled to watch the activity, and even to read the secret springs of action, of the most conspicuous of the Apostles of Christ at the meridian of his course.

This historic light on St. Paul and his surroundings, supported as it is by the united testimony of the writers of the early Church, affords evidence which in all ages has assured all students, even those who have doubted the authorship of other Epistles attributed to him, that at least these four Epistles are from the pen of the Great Apostle. This certainty of authorship gives to these Epistles a special value, even amid the other Epistles bearing St. Paul’s name and to those who confidently accept them all as genuine. In harmony with this mutual relation of the Epistles, the three volumes in which I have annotated them form one complete work. I have endeavoured, by tracing the line of thought of these Epistles and by comparing them each with the others and with the Book of Acts, to reproduce the thought and the movements and surroundings of the Apostle of the Gentiles at the noonday of his career. This reproduction I hope to supplement by another volume expounding the profound Epistles written during the seclusion of his first long imprisonment, viz. those to the Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon: by a fifth volume comprising both his two earliest and his three latest extant Epistles, viz. those written during his second missionary tour, to the newly-founded Church at Thessalonica, and those written, as I hope to prove, after his release from his first imprisonment; and to conclude the series by a volume expounding St. Paul’s teaching as a whole, comparing it with that of the other writers of the New Testament, and tracing the manifold teaching of these various writers to its one immediate source in the Gospel proclaimed by Christ and to its ultimate source in the Eternal Purpose of God. This aim will explain some peculiarities of this volume, as of those preceding it. The theological scope of the whole work has led me to compare the teaching of Paul with that of John and James; and the apparent contradiction between Paul and this last writer compelled me to expound an important paragraph of the Epistle of James. I have also still further discussed in a separate Dissertation, as the chief matter of the Epistle to the Galatians, the great doctrine of Justification by Faith. As an aid towards reproducing the surroundings of St. Paul, I have added biographical notes on some other leaders of the early Church. These notes I was the more ready to insert because the historical surroundings of St. Paul are evidence of the genuineness and authenticity of the documents embodying or recording his teaching and movements. This value as evidence gives interest even to minute personal details.

The long note on the Sabbath is inserted partly because of the importance of the subject and the unsatisfactory treatment it seems to me to have hitherto received, and in part because I am deeply convinced that the true place of the Lord’s Day in the New Covenant can be understood only in the light of the great principles expounded in this Epistle, of which principles the Christian Day of Rest affords a valuable illustration. To this note I wish to add that in my view the statement in Genesis 2:3, taken in connection with the traces, casual and scanty though they are, of a septenary division of time earlier than the Exodus or away from Israel, points towards the institution of the Sabbath at the Creation. This seems to me to be the easiest explanation of all the facts of the case. But the evidence of a single statement in the Bible and that not a categorical assertion of the matter in question, and of a very few and somewhat indistinct references in pagan books or monuments, is not such as can be safely made a ground of confident argument in a matter so important as the Lord’s Day. In my note I have endeavoured to show that the Christian Day of Rest bears on its front, in plain letters which every man can read for himself, the mark of its Divine origin and universal purpose. Reliance upon the scanty indications referred to above only obscures this more solid proof. On the other hand, this better proof, when once it is firmly established, receives confirmation even from these casual and scanty indications. For, if the Day of Rest was designed for all mankind, it is easy to believe that it was ordained at the Creation of the World. It must, I fear, be admitted that the Epistle to the Galatians is not a general favourite. It is intensely doctrinal: and doctrinal theology is not only at first sight void of beauty but seems to belong rather to the college lecture hall than to practical life. Moreover, St. Paul’s arguments are difficult to follow: and the matters he discusses pertain apparently to questions which have long ago passed away.

But Christian doctrines are uninteresting and void of beauty only when our view of them is distorted or partial. For they are an attempt to comprehend and to present the Eternal Thought and Purpose of God’s Love to Man. And, just as this thought and purpose are the noblest conceivable outflow of the mind of God, so are they the noblest object of human research and the most fascinating object of human contemplation. Eternal Truth cannot but be beautiful, when seen in its real proportions. The possible unattractiveness of its first partial appearance is but the painful effort of the finite eye of man to adapt itself to the brightness of Infinite Grandeur. Similarly, the demonstrations of Newton’s Principia may, when imperfectly understood or when taken singly, seem uninteresting. But, without these demonstrations, the profoundly interesting generalisation of Universal Gravitation could not have been reached and cannot now be fully appreciated.

Moreover, St. Paul’s earnestness about the theological matters which in this Epistle he discusses, matters once agitating the Christian communities in Galatia and Antioch and Jerusalem, assures us of their immense importance to the spiritual life of the early Churches. And that which was vital then cannot but be important now. For the great questions of the Christian life belong to all ages. It is also very instructive to see, as in this Epistle, abstract doctrines assuming living form in actual Church life. And that the forms then assumed have passed away and have therefore no abiding interest, is an advantage: for it leaves our mind free to contemplate, without the prejudice evoked by the questions of our own day, broad underlying principles.

In this volume, as in the earlier ones, my chief aids in tracing the Apostle’s thought have been a careful grammatical analysis of his words and sentences and a logical analysis of his argument.

The short comparison here given of St. Paul’s conception of the Gospel and of Christ with that of other writers of the New Testament is an anticipation of a fuller comparison in my concluding volume. Such comparison is of immense value. For, the conception of the Gospel even by an Apostle was moulded and coloured by his mental and moral constitution and by his history and surroundings. This conception was sufficient to enable him correctly and fully to preach Christ. But the imperfect reproduction which is all that we can now obtain of St. Paul’s theology is not sufficient for us. We must endeavour to compensate in some measure for the imperfection of our reproduction of his conception by comparing it with what we can reproduce of the thought of other Sacred Writers. Thus, by combining various reflections in the minds of various men, we shall gain the best view possible to us of the great object at which they all reverently gazed.

I cannot forbear to point out the serious damage to theology from over-eagerness to assert and to press upon others the doctrines resulting from theological study, without first proving that they are involved in the teaching of Christ or of His Apostles. Excuse for this eagerness is found in the light and life derived from the doctrines advocated: for this light and life are, to the eager advocates, no small proof that the doctrines are true. But our own inward spiritual life cannot convince others. And, unless we show that our teaching is a necessary logical inference from the acknowledged teaching of the Apostles, our words are to others only a human dogma supported simply by our own fallible authority or that of the school of thought we represent. Such authority we have no right to expect any one to accept as decisive. The teacher who wishes to produce intelligent conviction should hide himself behind the frequent teaching of St. Paul or St. John; and show that in this teaching the Apostle quoted is supported by other writers of the New Testament. Doctrines supported by this combined authority, few will refuse to accept as genuine teaching of Christ. And this authority can be adduced for all the chief doctrines of Christianity. To aid theological research on these lines, is one aim of the present work, and accounts for some of its peculiarities. A few words now about the relation of this method of research to the Dogmas of the Christian Church.

By Dogma I mean a formulated statement claiming to be accepted as true, not because of argument adduced, but because of the authority asserting it. Or, apart from any claim to implicit acceptance, theological dogma may be understood to include all formulated statements embodying Christian teaching approved either by the early undivided Church or by any of the Churches of later days. It is a definite reflection, in the mind of the Universal Church or of some section of it, of the revelation of God in Christ, a reflection shaped and therefore in some measure distorted by the imperfection of the mirror. Of dogma thus understood, the creeds of the early Councils and the canons of the Council of Trent are good examples. To limit the word to this meaning, seems to me much better than to use it more loosely as synonymous with Systematic or Doctrinal Theology. The dogmas, even of the early undivided Church, I am not prepared to accept as in themselves decisive, i.e. as infallible witnesses of the teaching of Christ. For I cannot find proof, in the promises of Christ or elsewhere, that such councils are incapable of error. At the same time, the judgment of the early Church is the testimony of a witness claiming highest respect. And, as matter of fact, it seems to me that the creeds of the early Councils agree in the main with the teaching of the Apostles.

Even the declarations about doctrine of later Churches are of great value as an expression of Christian opinion. Indeed, even statements we are compelled to reject are sometimes of no small use: for error becomes more evident when it assumes dogmatic form. Moreover, although the student will at first be puzzled by conflicting opinions of different Churches, he will soon rejoice to find underneath these differences a broad foundation of agreement about the central truths of Christianity. This agreement is a further confirmation that the teaching of the writers of the New Testament is from Christ, and is essential truth. As an aid to its discovery the dogmas of the Church and the Churches are of great value.

The general arrangement of the work is as before. The text of the Epistle is broken up into Divisions and Sections: and, of these, the titles read consecutively form a shorter and a longer outline of the Epistle. Of the value of such divisions and titles as a means of tracing the writer’s argument, I am day by day more deeply convinced. Indeed. to mark the turning points of thought and argument, is one of the most difficult and most important tasks of the expositor. These divisions also greatly aid frequent review of the path already trodden, an essential condition of sure progress along the Apostle’s line of thought.

A comparison of the various divisions adopted by various commentators and by the Westminster Revisers reveals the extent to which the analysis of the Epistle is evident and indisputable. For, some divisions are accepted by all: others are variously placed. But even a division open to doubt is much better than none: for imperfect attempts often lead, sometimes by their manifest incorrectness, to discovery of the truth.

My translation of the Epistles to the Romans and the Corinthians has received from different critics criticisms most contradictory. Not a few of these criticisms have been occasioned by oversight of its aim. Nothing was further from my thought than to attempt a rendering suitable for general use. I have had no wish to rival the Revised Version. But it would have been worse than useless to reprint an existing translation: for, with a commentary, the student should use his own familiar copy of Holy Scripture. My translation was designed to supply, in some degree, the place occupied in critical commentaries by the Greek text. I have endeavoured to reproduce, more fully than their necessary limitations permitted the Revisers to do, at any sacrifice of elegance or even of English idiom, the sense and emphasis of the original. This I have tried to do sometimes by circumlocution, more frequently by a literal reproduction of the words and order actually written by St. Paul. The translation is printed, not at the top of each page, but at the beginning of each Section, to suggest that before going on to the notes the student should read carefully the Apostle’s own words.

Of commentaries on the Epistle, I have consulted all within my reach. The commentaries on St. Paul’s Epistles mentioned in the preface to my volume on Romans have again been my companions; and with equal profit. Luther’s famous work has been constantly in my hands. I have read it with unflagging interest and great benefit. It is true that modern research has corrected not a few points in the Reformer’s exegesis. And it is unfortunately true (see Diss. vi.). that occasionally his firm grasp of the great life-giving doctrine of Justification by Faith has obscured his view of other related doctrines, and has thus led him to incorrect or dangerous assertions. But in spite of the immense progress since his day in exact New Testament scholarship, and in spite of some blemishes, it is yet my deliberate judgment that, for the purpose for which the Epistle was written and for its chief practical worth now, Luther has caught and reproduced the inmost thought of St. Paul more richly than has any other writer, ancient or modern. The Reformer’s disposition and history and surroundings placed him in sympathy with the Apostle to a degree which no mere scholarship can reach. His commentary on Galatians has therefore an interest which can never pass away.

Of modern German commentaries, after the invaluable work of Meyer, the thoughtful and thorough work of Wieseler has been of most use to me. In this volume I have for the first time had the highly valued guidance of two writers whose names are already household words in English Biblical scholarship. I refer to the commentaries of Bishops Ellicott and Lightfoot. To the former of these writers my obligations, even in preparing my earlier volumes, are far beyond my power to express. The shape of his work was instructive. By issuing it in small volumes, each expounding only one short Epistle. Dr. Ellicott did his readers the great service of confining their attention for the time to one short portion of Holy Scripture. And his example in analysing each word and inflexion of St. Paul’s Epistles has exerted on my entire study of the Bible an influence which I can neither measure nor describe, and for which I am ever grateful. Each of his volumes, from end to end, I have carefully read. Dr. Ellicott’s first volume, that on the Epistle to the Galatians, appeared a generation ago, when exact exposition of the New Testament was hardly known in this country. The immense progress since that day is in no small degree a result of the grammatical labours embodied in his commentaries.

Some decisions in Dr. Ellicott’s early notes on Textual Criticism cannot now be defended; and only reveal the advance made since they were written. But these notes did much good by calling attention to the subject; and not unfrequently they anticipate judgments now universally accepted. Equally valuable on the whole is Dr. Lightfoot’s volume on the Epistle before us. Not quite so exact as Dr. Ellicott in his chosen province of grammar, Dr. Lightfoot is unequalled in a broader and more popular line which he has marked out for himself. He has given admirable English renderings of St. Paul’s Greek words and phrases, and equally good paraphrases of entire paragraphs. Most valuable illustrations of St. Paul’s language are brought from the whole round of Greek literature. Important various readings are carefully discussed. And matters of special interest bearing upon the Epistle are treated with great thoroughness and illustrated by a wealth of scholarship which is truly wonderful. The whole volume is a monument of sacred learning of which any nation or age might justly be proud. It has had my most careful and respectful study.

While accepting with thankfulness these great teachers, my work has been very much more than a popular reproduction of theirs. Even on their own ground I have at every point tested their work by independent research. Not one quotation has been taken from them without verification: not one decision of theirs has been accepted without careful sifting. Sometimes I have had to decide between their conflicting opinions. And very rarely (e.g. on Galatians 6:6) I have been compelled to dissent from their united judgment.

Moreover, the somewhat different aim of my commentary led me along a path which did not lie within the scope of either of these great expositors. Their chief aim was to trace, the one by exact grammatical analysis, the other by bringing to bear upon it light from all sources, the Apostle’s line of thought in the Epistle annotated. To me St. Paul’s line of thought was not so much itself an end as a means of reaching his general conception of the Gospel and of Christ. My aim is thus, in some sense, a stage in advance of theirs. Indeed, by selecting this as my special aim I have followed a suggestion of Dr. Ellicott in the preface to his volume on Galatians that each commentator confine himself to a special province of exposition. But inasmuch as I could not reach my further department without passing through theirs, I have trodden again the ground on which they had previously laboured, using with thankfulness the path which their footsteps have made. It seemed to me that beyond their field of labour lay another field most fruitful in spiritual good, and that I should best advance the real ultimate aim of their work by pressing forward, along the solid way they have formed, to the richer land beyond.

A still further province of theological research is reached by combining the already reproduced conceptions of the Gospel by individual Apostles in order thus to gain a view, infinitely imperfect as it must ever be, of the one Eternal Reality underlying these individual conceptions.

The spiritual and practical nature of the aim noted above has enabled me to put the results of my study into a form accessible, not only to students of the Greek Testament for whom alone Bishops Ellicott and Lightfoot have written, but to all intelligent readers of the English Bible. I have thus been able to hold out a light to many earnest followers of Christ who cannot use the great works just referred to.

Of popular commentaries on the Epistle to the Galatians, the best I have seen is that by Dean Howson in ‘The Speaker’s Commentary,’ which is good from beginning to end and has often been of use to me. But the limits of the large work of which it is a part do not allow him nearly so much space for exposition as I have occupied: and the general scope of the whole work does not include the distinctive theological features so conspicuous in my volumes.

And now my work with all its many inperfections must go forth to the world. For more than two years it has been my constant companion. Throughout that period the letter of the Great Apostle to his wayward disciples in Galatia has borne in my own spiritual life abundant fruit. And, whatever may become of the book I have written, I am sure that a careful study of this Epistle and of the great doctrines therein so carefully and earnestly expounded will produce in all sincere and loving students results far above their highest expectations.

Epworth lodge, wrexham, n. Wales,

26th January, 1885.

Preface to the Fifth Edition.

BEET_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 12

GALATIANS

PREFACE TO THE FIFTH EDITION.

TWELVE years have elapsed since the first edition of this work appeared. But during that time little or no additional light has been shed on the meaning of this Epistle; and not very much on any part of the New Testament. At an earlier date, an immense impulse was given to New Testament scholarship by the epoch-making grammar of Winer; and by very able German commentators, of whom Meyer was the best, who gladly and skilfully used the powerful instrument thus put in their hands. In their steps followed the English scholars Ellicott and Lightfoot, whose commentaries on this Epistle appeared in the years 1854 and 1865 respectively. Their works, with that of Meyer, are still the best expositions of the Epistle to the Galatians.

During recent years, several popular commentaries have been published. Of these, the best on this Epistle is by my friend Prof. Findlay, who, in a most attractive form, has given to the reader of the English Bible a thoroughly good exposition. My own work differs from his chiefly in its closer adherence to the words of the Epistle, in more frequent summaries of the Apostle’s line of thought, and in various notes in which I have endeavoured to gather together and systematise the results of my exposition. In this way I have used the Epistle as a means of reaching St. Paul’s thought about Christ and the Gospel. This different aim is very conspicuous in the eight dissertations at the close of the volume. Another commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians, for ‘The International Critical Commentary,’ is promised by my friend Prof. E. D. Burton, of the University of Chicago, who is already known by an able work on the Greek tenses.

In a very interesting volume on ‘The Church in the Roman Empire,’ Prof. W. M. Ramsay endeavours to prove that the “Galatians” and “the Churches of Galatia” in Galatians 1:2; 3:1; 1 Corinthians 16:1, were those at Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe, founded by St. Paul on his first missionary journey.

This theory implies that the Galatians to whom St. Paul wrote did not belong to the Keltic race which gave its name to the Roman province of Galatia, but to another race or races inhabiting an outlying district which had been incorporated with that province. We notice, however, that of the four cities to which Prof. Ramsay supposes that St. Paul wrote, two are called in Acts 14:6 “cities of Lycaonia”; and in one of them, as we read in Acts 14:11, the Lycaonian language was spoken. A third is called, in Acts 13:14, “Antioch of Pisidia”: and the remaining one was usually spoken of as belonging to Phrygia. It is most unlikely that a letter to these four cities would be addressed, without further specification, to “the Churches of Galatia.”

Moreover, in Galatians 4:13 St. Paul writes that his first preaching of the Gospel to his readers was occasioned by “weakness of the flesh.” This can only mean that he was detained among them by sickness, and that to this cause was due the founding of the Churches of Galatia. It is inconceivable that St. Paul’s first visit to Antioch in Pisidia, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe, of which we have a full account in Acts 13:14-14:23, was in any way occasioned by sickness.

In Acts 16:1-5 we read that on his second missionary journey St. Paul, accompanied by Silas, after passing through Syria and Cilicia, came to Derbe and Lystra, and gave to the Christians there the decrees of the conference at Jerusalem; and that the Churches were strengthened and increased. The writer adds, in Acts 16:6, “And they went through the Phrygian and Galatian country; having been hindered by the Holy Spirit from speaking the word in Asia.” This can only mean that their journey in Phrygia and Galatia was due to a prohibition to preach in the Roman province of Asia. Prof. Ramsay’s theory compels him to take this verse as a summary of Acts 16:1-4, and to suppose that “the Phrygian and Galatian country” included Derbe and Lystra. But St. Paul’s visit to his converts in these cities, or in Iconium, cannot have been prompted by any prohibition to preach in the province of Asia. And if not, Acts 16:6 must describe a journey beyond that recorded in Acts 16:1-4. This further journey was in a country called Phrygian and Galatian. If on that journey St. Paul founded Churches, we need not wonder that he afterwards addressed them as “the Churches of Galatia.” For an explanation of this phrase, we have no need to go to the Churches in Lycaonia and Pisidia. A difficulty is found in Acts 16:7: “Having come over against Mysia, they tried to go into Bithynia: but the Spirit of Jesus did not allow them.” But this difficulty is not lessened by Prof. Ramsay’s suggestion. For even South Galatia is as near to Bithynia as to Mysia. The explanation is probably lost in the indefinite expression, “the Phrygian and Galatian country.”

The above objections to Prof. Ramsay’s theory seem to me much more serious than any difficulties involved in the theory he combats. The easiest explanation of the scanty evidence at our command is that St. Paul intended, after visiting his converts at Derbe and Lystra, and probably at Iconium and Antioch, to go along the great road leading through Colossae and Laodicea to Ephesus, the important metropolis of the province of Asia; that this purpose was set aside by an intimation from the Spirit of God; and that Paul and Silas then turned northward, instead of eastward, through a country known as Phrygia and through other parts of the province of Galatia. In this province he was detained by sickness; and here he planted Churches. He afterwards purposed to go into Bithynia. But the Spirit forbad this; as already He had forbidden the missionaries to preach in Asia. This prohibition left no path open to them except to pass through Mysia to the sea-coast at Troas; whence by a vision they were called to cross over to Macedonia. These hindrances and this vision were evidently designed to show that St. Paul’s steps were divinely guided towards Europe, the future home of Christianity.

For the above reasons, after carefully reading Prof. Ramsay’s argument, I still adhere to the location of the Churches of Galatia given in the earlier editions of this volume.

With a few corrections and alterations, the work remains as in former editions.

RICHMOND,

13th February, 1897.

Contents.

BEET_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 15

GALATIANS

CONTENTS.

INTRODUCTION

Sec. 1. IS THE EPISTLE GENUINE?

Sec. 2. TO WHAT EXTENT ARE OUR COPIES AND VERSIONS CORRECT? Sec. 3. THE GALATIANS AND THE CHURCHES OF GALATIA. EXPOSITION

Sec. 1. Ch. 1:1-5. Apostolic Greeting to the Galatian Christians. Sec. 2. Ch. 1:6-10. Their early Apostacy.

DIV. I. PAUL’S CONTRARY CONDUCT AND PRINCIPLES. CHS. 1:10—2. Sec. 3. Ch. 1:11, 12. Paul’s Gospel is divine.

Sec. 4. Ch. 1:13, 14. His former life.

Sec. 5. Ch. 1:15-17. His conversion and journey to Arabia. Sec. 6. Ch. 1:18-24. His visit to, and early departure from, Jerusalem Sec. 7. Ch. 2:1-10.A subsequent visit to Jerusalem. Sec. 8. Ch. 2:11-23. Paul’s resistance to Peter, and exposition of his own principles.

[THE LORD’S BROTHERS.] [JAMES.] [PETER.] [JOHN.] [BARNABAS.] DIV. II. JUSTIFICATION IS BY FAITH, APART FROM LAW AND THEREFORE FROM CIRCUMCISION. CHS. 3.—5:13a.

Sec. 9. Ch. 3:1-5. By faith the Galatian Christians received the Spirit. Sec. 10. Ch. 3:6-9. Just so, by faith Abraham was justified. Sec. 11. Ch. 3:10-14. For, the Law brings only a curse. Sec. 12. Ch. 3:15-18. Yet the Law cannot set aside the still earlier promise. Sec. 13. Ch. 3:19-24. The Law was designed to lead us to faith in Christ. Sec. 14. Ch. 3:25-29. By faith we are, in Christ, heirs of Abraham. Sec. 15. Ch. 4:1-7. Pupilage is past: and we have received the Spirit of Adoption.

Sec. 16. Ch. 4:8-11. Then turn not back to things left behind. [THE SABBATH.]

Sec. 17. Ch. 4:12-20. Personal appeal to the Galatians. Sec. 18. Ch. 4:21-5:1. The Covenants of Bondage and of Freedom. Sec. 19. Ch. 5:2-13a. To receive Circumcision is to reject Christ. DIV. III. CHRISTIAN MORALS. CHS. 5:13b-6:10.

Sec. 20. Ch. 5:13b-15. Love to our neighbour is the sum of the Law. Sec. 21. Ch. 5:16-26. The Spirit and the Flesh. Sec. 22. Ch. 6:1-10. Special Applications.

CONCLUSION OF THE EPISTLE. CH. 6:11-18.

Sec. 23. Ch. 6:11-16. The Adversaries are insincere. Sec. 24. Ch. 6:17, 18. Farewell.

[THE DISTURBERS IN GALATIA.] [REVIEW OF THE EPISTLE.] DISSERTATIONS

Diss. 1. THE BOOK OF ACTS COMPARED WITH THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS.

Diss. 2. THE EPISTLES TO THE CORINTHIANS AND TO THE ROMANS COMPARED WITH THAT TO THE GALATIANS.

Diss. 3. THE DATE OF THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. Diss. 4. THE EPISTLE OF JAMES COMPARED WITH THAT TO THE GGALATIANS. Diss. 5. THE GOSPEL AND FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN COMPARED WITH THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS.

Diss. 6. JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH.

Diss. 7. THE CROSS OF CHRIST.

Diss. 8. SUMMARY OF RESULTS.

Section 1. — Is the Epistle Genuine?

BEET_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 17

GALATIANS

INTRODUCTION TO THE EPISTLE TO THE

GALATIANS.

SECTION 1. — IS THE EPISTLE GENUINE?

1. The external evidence quoted in proof that the Epistle to the Romans was written by Paul is equally valid for that to the Galatians.

2. This Epistle, like those to the Romans and Corinthians, is found in all Greek manuscripts of Paul’s Epistles; and in the Latin, Syriac, Egyptian, Gothic, Armenian, and Ethiopic versions.

3. The Epistle was accepted by the entire early Church, without a shadow of doubt, as a genuine work of Paul.

JEROME, in the Preface to his commentary on the Epistle, a work still extant, says that ORIGEN “wrote five volumes on the Epistle of Paul to the Galatians.” Unfortunately, of this earliest commentary there remain only three fragments preserved in a surviving Latin translation of bk. i. of the Apology for Origen by Pamphilus. But in his extant works Origen frequently quotes this Epistle (e.g. on Romans 3:27, 29) as written to the Galatians by Paul the Apostle.

TERTULLIAN (Against Marcion bk. v. 2-4) names the Epistle expressly as written to the Galatians by Paul the Apostle, and gives a full outline of it, with many quotations. He reasons with Marcion from it, as being accepted by him as genuine, whereas some other parts of the New Testament he rejected. This long argument proves that the Epistle was accepted, not only by Tertullian at the close of the second century, but in the middle of the century even by a famous enemy of the Gospel.

CLEMENT of ALEXANDRIA quotes the Epistle to the Galatians less frequently even in proportion to its length than those to the Romans and Corinthians. This is explained by the fact that it refers almost exclusively to a Jewish error with which Clement had little to do. His quotations are for the more part passages bearing upon general Christian life. They are, however, abundantly sufficient to prove beyond possibility of doubt that Clement accepted the Epistle with perfect confidence as a work of Paul. Not unfrequently he quotes it anonymously. Sometimes he attributes it to “the Apostle”: e.g. Pedagogae bk. i. 6, where he quotes in full Galatians 3:23-28 and Galatians 4:1-5, 7. The context shows that “the Apostle” is Paul. So ch. 11: “Paul says that there was given a tutor for Christ.” Cp. Stromata (or Miscellanies) bk. iii. 15: “For which cause Paul writing to the Galatians says, My little children, for whom again I suffer birth-pangs until Christ be formed in you.”

IRENÆUS frequently quotes this Epistle by name as a work of the Apostle Paul. So Against Heresies bk. iii. 13. 3: “That Paul went up with Barnabas to Jerusalem to the Apostles, not without reason but in order that by them the liberty of the Gentiles should be confirmed, himself says in the Epistle to the Galatians: Then after fourteen years I went up to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking also Titus. But I went up according to revelation: and I set before them the Gospel-which I preach among the Gentiles. And again he says, For an hour we yielded by subjection that the truth of the Gospel may remain with you.” There are similar quotations in chs. 6. 5, 7. 2, 16. 7,

22. 1; a long quotation in bk. v. 11. 1, and others in chs. 21. 1, 32. 2. In bk. i. 3. 5, Irenæus quotes Galatians 6:14 as attributed to Paul by the VALENTINIANS; followers of a heretic contemporary with Marcion. Unfortunately, the above quotations are found only in a Latin translation, which is all that remains to us of a great part of the work of Irenæus. And early translations are always uncertain. Of error from this source the quotation above of Galatians 2:5 is an example. See notes. From Hippolytus, Heresies bk. v. 2, we infer that the Epistle was also known and used by the OPHITES, a still earlier sect.

The FRAGMENT of MURATORI says: “First of all to the Corinthians forbidding division of sect; then to the Galatians forbidding circumcision.” Several passages in writings still earlier than the above, suggest that the authors had seen the Epistle to the Galatians.

These quotations prove clearly that towards the close of the second century the Epistle was everywhere accepted with perfect confidence as a genuine work of the Apostle Paul. And the references to Heretics afford a strong presumption that it was accepted, alike by friends and foes, in the middle of the century.

4. This external evidence is strongly confirmed by the contents of the Epistle. For, it is in the last degree unlikely that any one, hoping to gain credence for a forgery, would fill it with severe censure of entire Churches mentioned by name; a censure hardly mitigated by a word of approval, and thus standing apart from all other extant rebukes by Paul. Moreover, although for this Epistle to the obscure Churches of Galatia we have not all the circumstantial evidence and incidental references to matters of fact fixing time and place of writing found in the Epistles to the Romans and Corinthians, yet we shall find in Diss. ii. abundant proof that all four Epistles are from the same pen. Consequently, the evidence that the other three Epistles were written by Paul is valid for the Epistle now before us. And several historical coincidences with the Book of Acts will, in Diss. i., afford special confirmation of its genuineness.

Section 2. — To What Extent Are Our Copies and Versions Correct

BEET_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 20

GALATIANS

SECTION 2. — TO WHAT EXTENT ARE OUR COPIES AND

VERSIONS CORRECT?

1. Of the changes adopted without note by the Revisers in their Greek text of the Epistle to the Galatians, the following are also adopted without note by all recent Critical Editors, viz. by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, and Westcott and Hort.

1. Galatians 1:10: omit 2nd for.

2. Galatians 1:18; 2:11, 14: Cephas for Peter.

3. Galatians 2:14: how for why.

4. Galatians 2:16: insert yet, or but, before knowing.

5. Galatians 3:1: omit that you should not obey the truth.

6. Galatians 3:1: omit among you.

7. Galatians 3:17: omit in Christ.

8. Galatians 3:23: see notes.

9. Galatians 3:29: omit and before heirs.

10. Galatians 4:6: our for your.

11. Galatians 4:7: through God for of God through Christ.

12. Galatians 4:14: temptation to you for my temptation.

13. Galatians 4:24: omit the, before two covenants.

14. Galatians 4:25: for she instead of 2nd and.

15. Galatians 5:1: rearrangement of the verse.

16. Galatians 5:14: has been fulfilled, for is fulfilled. See notes.

17. Galatians 5:17: for these are, instead of and these are.

18. Galatians 5:19: omit adultery.

19. Galatians 6:15: is for avails.

20. Galatians 6:17: omit the Lord.

Every one of these corrections is supported by a clear preponderance of ancient documents: Nos. 1-3, 5, 6, 9, 11, 13, 18, 19, by evidence so abundant and varied as to exclude doubt. And some of them, especially Nos. 6, 11, 13, 14, 17, 19, are of considerable importance.

2. The only changes affecting appreciably an English translation which the Revisers adopt without note and about which the critical texts differ are:—

1. Galatians 1:11: for instead of but.

2. Galatians 4:26: omit all.

3. Galatians 5:21: omit murderers.

4. Galatians 6:15: omit in Christ Jesus.

In No. 2, the Revisers’ reading is supported by a clear preponderance of the oldest and best MSS. and versions. It is accepted without note by all Editors since Lachmann who gave it a place in his margin; and is practically beyond doubt. Very interesting is No. 4. The displaced reading is found in all uncials except the Vatican MS. and in nearly all cursives, and in both Latin versions and the Coptic version; but looks so much like a reminiscence of Galatians 5:6 that with the Syriac and some other versions and with Chrysostom, Jerome, and Augustine we may somewhat confidently reject it. Similar insertions are very common; e.g. Galatians 3:1 from Galatians 5:7. The shorter reading, which the Revisers adopt, is given by Tischendorf, in the text of Tregelles, and without note by Westcott and Hort. About No. 1, both ancient documents and modern scholars are evenly divided. The Revisers’ reading is given without note by Tregelles and in the text of Westcott: the displaced reading, in the margin of Westcott and in the texts of Lachmann and Tischendorf. Internal evidence perhaps favours slightly the Revisers’ choice. But the uncertainty of the reading should have been noted in their margin. The omission in No. 3 is supported by the Vat. and Sinai MSS. and a few cursives, and by Irenaeus, Clement, Origen, Augustine, and Jerome. The omitted word is found in all other uncials and most cursives, and in the oldest and best versions. It is omitted by Tischendorf and Westcott; and is marked as doubtful by Lachmann and Tregelles. Probability seems to incline to the Revisers’ choice. But confident decision is impossible; and unimportant. In Nos. 3, 4 the testimony of the Fathers is unusually trustworthy because the quotations found in existing copies of their writings contradict the readings current when these copies were made.

3. The most important reading open to doubt in the Epistle to the Galatians is Galatians 4:25, where the Revisers’ margin records an alternative as read by “many ancient authorities.” See my note. Amid the utter confusion of ancient documents and the conflicting opinions of Critical Editors, the reading of the Revisers’ text seems to me to have a slight balance of probability. But certain decision is impossible. The only other similar marginal note is in Galatians 4:28, where the reading is quite uncertain and altogether unimportant.

Of the three alternatives noted in the Revisers’ margin as read by “some ancient authorities,” viz. Galatians 1:3, 8; 6:13, the reading in their text is in each case supported by evidence fairly preponderant. Of these, only the last is important.

4. The only readings worthy of mention and not noted by the Revisers are:—

1. Galatians 1:15: him for God.

2. Galatians 1:17: went away for went up.

3. Galatians 2:12: he came for they came.

4. Galatians 2:20: God and Christ for the Son of God.

5. Galatians 3:21: in law for from law. (R.V. of the law.)

6. Galatians 4:19: children for little children.

7. Galatians 5:7: truth instead of the truth.

8. Galatians 5:20: jealousy for jealousies.

9. Galatians 6:2: ye will fulfil for fulfil.

10. Galatians 6:18: the for our.

Nos. 3, 4 are very interesting variations, and are given by Lachmann without note and in the text of Tregelles. But documentary evidence condemns the latter: and internal improbability, in conjunction with the likelihood of its being copied from Galatians 2:11, discredits the former. Both are rejected by Tischendorf, and without note by Westcott. No. 3 is the only reading in this Epistle certainly wrong and yet supported by the joint testimony of the Vat. and Sinai MSS. With these agree the Clermont MS. Greek and Latin, and the Greek part of two later Greco-Latin copies and the Latin part of one of them; and undoubtedly Origen, who interprets it to mean that James himself came to Antioch. This is one of the very few cases in which an early error crept into the oldest and best copies but disappears entirely from later copies. The other reading, which we are compelled to accept, is supported by the Alexandrian and Ephraim MSS. and almost all the Greek cursives, and by the very valuable Coptic (Egyptian) version, the Latin Vulgate, and the Syriac versions. ln Nos. 1, 2, the overlooked readings are supported by the Vat. MS. and the Syriac version, but have (especially No. 1) rather stronger documentary evidence against them. The unimportant variation in No. 5 is found apparently only in the Vat. MS. and a quotation in Cyril; but is preferred by Westcott. In No. 6, the rejected reading is again supported by the Vat. and Sinai MSS.: but internal probability is against it. See notes. In No. 7, a reading probably correct is passed over by the Revisers: see note. But the difference is hardly perceptible in an English Version. In No. 8, documentary evidence is fairly divided. The overlooked reading is given without note by all Editors, except in the margin of Westcott. It is quite unimportant. In No. 9, there is perhaps a slight preponderance of documentary evidence for the reading retained by the Revisers. The variation in No. 10 is noted only in the margin of Westcott. It is found in the Sinai MS. and one later uncial; but is rejected by all other documents. It will be observed that the readings passed over by the Revisers are without exception unimportant or improbable.

5. From the foregoing it appears that the only readings in the Epistle to the Galatians important and yet open to doubt are in Galatians 1:11, 15, 17; 4:25, 28; 6:2, 13, 15. And of these the only one seriously affecting the course of Paul’s argument is that in Galatians 4:25. With these exceptions the Greek text adopted by the Revisers may be accepted with reasonable confidence as containing the actual words written by Paul.

6. In the REVISED VERSION of the Epistle to the Galatians among many improvements, I note the following. The Greek present tense is better reproduced in Galatians 1:6, ye are quickly removing; Galatians 1:10, if I were still pleasing men; Galatians 2:2, should be running; Galatians 5:2, if ye receive circumcision; Galatians 6:13, they who receive circumcision. And these changes do more than appears at first sight to make clear the drift of the Epistle. The most important improvement is in Galatians 5:17, that ye may not do the things that ye would, instead of so that ye cannot do, etc. Paul’s words denote, not an actual and necessary result, as the A.V. suggests, but a constant tendency of the abiding opposition of the flesh and the Spirit. The rendering Anathema reprints in English letters a Greek word used in Galatians 1:8, 9 and in Romans 9:3; 1 Corinthians 12:3; 16:22; Acts 23:14, itself a frequent rendering of a Hebrew word embodying a very definite O.T. conception, e.g. Leviticus 27:28, 29; Joshua 6:17, 18; 7:1. It thus does good service by reproducing a technical term. The rendering live in faith reproduces Paul’s thought in Galatians 2:20 more correctly than by faith: as does by the Spirit instead of in the spirit in Galatians 5:16, and in the Spirit in Galatians 5:25. The renderings manner of life and zealously seek you, in Galatians 1:13; 4:17, make obscure phrases clear. In Galatians 4:13 the rendering, because of an infirmity of the flesh restores an historical reference hardly perceptible before. The rendering kept in ward in Galatians 3:23 is both picturesque and exact: and tutor is probably the best English equivalent of the Greek word used in Galatians 3:24f. Stood condemned in Galatians 2:11, would cut themselves off in Galatians 5:12, with how large letters in Galatians 6:11, are more accurate renderings, and are of some importance.

The marginal note to Galatians 1:4 explaining world by age is very valuable.

Against these undeniable improvements, I can set, as in my view a change for the worse, only the phrase faith in the Son of God in Galatians 2:20, which obscures somewhat the different construction in Paul and John of the word faith. See my Romans, p. 147. {Romans 5:1} The unsuitable use of the prepositions of and unto, where from or by and for would have been more accurate and more intelligible, already referred to in my Corinthians, p. 540, is found in the Epistle to the Galatians in Galatians 3:18, 21; 5:15; 6:8; and Galatians 2:8; 3:23. But the change in Galatians 1:1, not from men instead of not of men, in Galatians 1:12 receive it from man instead of of man, in Galatians 5:13 for freedom instead of unto liberty, are real gains. On the whole it can hardly be denied that the thoughts which Paul wished to convey by this Epistle are reproduced much more correctly in the New than in the Old Version.

Section 3. — The Galatians and the Churches of Galatia.

BEET_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 25

GALATIANS

SECTION 3. — THE GALATIANS

AND THE CHURCHES OF GALATIA.

1. The name Galatians was given by the Greek historians and geographers, e.g. Polybius, Strabo, Pausanias, to a race which before the dawn of history occupied the whole apparently of what is now France. By still earlier writers the same people were called Kelts. So Herodotus, bk. ii. 33, iv. 49: “The Danube rises among the Kelts… who live outside the pillars of Hercules, and border the Kynesians, who of the inhabitants of Europe are furthest towards the setting sun.” Similarly, Strabo (bk. iv. 1, p. 189) speaks of the people around Marseilles as being formerly called Kelts; and says that “all the Galatians were called Kelts by the Greeks.” By Roman writers, e.g. Caesar and Livy, the same people were usually called Gauls. So Cæsar, Gallic War bk. i. 1: “In their own language they are called Kelts; in ours Gauls.” Whether the names Galatians or Gauls, and Kelts, were exactly synonymous, cannot now be determined with certainty.

2. The very close similarity between the Breton language which still survives in North-western France and the Welsh, assures us that the races separated for long centuries by the British Channel were originally one. And we cannot doubt that in France as in Britain this one language extended formerly much further east than it does now, until in France it was supplanted by the modified Latin we now call French and until in Britain both race and language were driven westward by the tide of Saxon and English invasion. Similarly, Varro, quoted by Jerome in his Galatians, (Pref. to bk. 2,) says that the people of Marseilles spoke three languages, Greek, Latin, Gallic. This last can only be the parent of the language still surviving in Brittany. We may therefore suppose that at the Christian era a nationality and language practically the same extended from the neighbourhood of Marseilles to the Forth and the Clyde. Of this nationality the tribes occupying France were known to Greek and Latin writers as Galatians and Gauls.

A stage further removed from Welsh and Breton than these one from the other, and yet akin, are the still more closely connected dialects surviving in Ireland, Man, and the Scotch Highlands. This more distant kinship is confirmed by the name Gaelic, by which in some form for centuries this Northern branch of the Keltic language has been known, so similar to the name given by the Greeks and Latins to the Southern branch. But geographical reasons forbid us to doubt that the language of ancient Gaul was the parent, not of modern Gaelic, but of Breton.

3. The movements of the southern Kelts within historic times, we shall now trace. In B.C. 390, an irruption of Gauls, after occupying Northern Italy, attacked Rome and nearly destroyed the rising republic. In B.C. 280 another similar irruption poured into Macedonia and Greece, and was with difficulty repulsed from the national sanctuary at Delphi. Immediately afterwards a detachment of the same horde passed over the Hellespont, and spread through and ravaged Asia Minor as far as the Taurus mountains. Subsequently, their ravages were checked by surrounding kings, and the race confined to that central part of Asia Minor which received the permanent name of Galatia. Livy recounts (bk. 38) their subjection in B.C. 189 by the Roman consul Manlius. The fame of this Roman victory reached Judaea, and is recorded in 1 Maccabees 8:2. Galatia then became an independent kingdom under the protection of Rome, until in B.C. 25 it was formed by Augustus, with the addition of Lycaonia and parts of Phrygia and Pisidia, into the Roman province of Galatia.

Since Derbe and Lystra, and apparently Iconium and Antioch in Pisidia, were within the Roman province of Galatia, although outside the country inhabited by the Keltic immigrants, we naturally ask whether the Christians in these cities were included in the Churches of Galatia. If so, we have in Acts 13:14-14:23; 16:1-5 an account of the founding of the earliest of these Churches. But the description of these cities in Acts 14:6 as cities of Lycaonia, and the mention in Acts 16:6; 18:23, along with Galatia, of Phrygia which was no Roman province but only a popular designation surviving from earlier times, suggests that also the term Galatia was used in its popular and older sense for the country of the Keltic settlers and that it did not include the Lycaonian cities.

4. Of Galatia, thus understood, the chief cities in Paul’s day (so Strabo, bk. xii. 5, p. 567) were Tavium, Ancyra, and Pessinus. This last was the greatest commercial city of those parts. It was also famous as the chief seat of the worship of Cybele, called in Galatia Agdistis, the mother of the gods, the most famous goddess of all Western Asia; and formerly her priests were rulers of the city. Her worship was marked by wildest orgies and hideous mutilations. See under Galatians 5:12. Of these cities, the second alone remains, under the modern name of Angora, containing now some 20,000 inhabitants, and famous for the beautiful silky hair of the Angora goats.

5. The similarity of name and the story of their migration assure us that the Galatian settlers in Asia Minor belonged to the race which from pre-historic times occupied France; that is, as we have seen, to the Southern branch of the great Keltic race. This is confirmed by Jerome, who tells us (Epistle to the Galatians, preface to bk. ii.) that the language of the Asiatic Galatians was almost the same as that spoken at Treves on the Moselle. For many centuries the people of Treves have been German. But we can easily believe that these supplanted, and drove West, earlier Keltic inhabitants, some of whom remained to Jerome’s day. Certainly, this is easier than to suppose that the Asiatic Galatians were German, a suggestion almost destitute of other support. Jerome’s remark proves that 300 years after Paul’s day the European settlers in Asia Minor clung to their own language; and therefore formed a distinct element of the population.

That the ancient Galatians or Gauls were allied to the modern Keltic races, is confirmed by the scanty remains of their language, chiefly proper names. One example will suffice. When the Gauls poured over the Alps and attacked Rome, and when a hundred years later they entered Greece, their king is in each case called, by the Latin and Greek historians, Brennus. The sameness of name indicates an official title. Its meaning is found in Brenin, the common Welsh word for king. These various indications make it quite possible that Paul heard in Galatia a language closely akin to that spoken to-day among the mountains of Wales.

On the nationality of the Galatians, see a very able dissertation in Lightfoot’s Galatians.

The character of the European and Asiatic Galatians or Gauls is drawn with great clearness and agreement by many ancient writers: e.g. Caesar, Gallic War bk. iv. 5. They are represented as very eager and bold in a new thing or a first assault, but lacking perseverance, as ready to learn but incapable of prolonged application; and as given to intemperance, avarice, and superstition. And the eagerness and inconstancy of Paul’s readers (cp. Galatians 1:6; 4:14f) are the chief features reflected on the pages of this Epistle.

6. With the Keltic race must have been intermingled in Asiatic Galatia surrounding nationalities. Doubtless there were, as everywhere in Asia Minor, men of Greek race and culture. And from Josephus (Antiquities bk. xii. 3. 4) we learn that many Jewish families had settled in the neighbourhood of Galatia. Descendants of the original Phrygian inhabitants would not be wanting. And, at least in the chief centres, the ruling Roman race would be. Probably among all these the Keltic race, which had given its name to the country, would predominate.

7. Very scanty is our knowledge of Paul’s intercourse with the Galatians earlier than this letter. In Acts 16:6 we find that, on his second missionary journey, after visiting Derbe and Lystra, and doubtless Iconium, and Antioch in Pisidia, he passed through the Phrygian and Galatian country; a reason being that he was prevented by the Holy Spirit from preaching in the Roman province (cp. Acts 20:18) of Asia, of which the capital was Ephesus. This hindrance implies that Paul intended to go there. And, if so, his route from Lycaonia would lead him through the country popularly known as Phrygia. From this we infer that the change of route caused by the Spirit’s hindrance was that, instead of going on westward to Ephesus, Paul turned north-eastward to Galatia. From Galatia he travelled westward to Mysia; and intended then to go northward to Bithynia. But the Spirit again hindered him; and he came down to Troas and passed over to Europe. The narrative of the Book of Acts makes us almost certain that this was Paul’s first visit to Galatia. And, that in Acts 18:23 we find him confirming disciples in Galatia and Phrygia, implies that on a former visit, as we might well expect, he preached the Gospel there. We have no reason to doubt that these two visits to Galatia are the visit mentioned, and the second visit implied, in Galatians 4:13. See notes. If so, Paul’s first visit to Galatia resulted from divine overruling of his totally different purpose: his sojourn there was prolonged by serious and humiliating sickness: and the visit thus painfully prolonged occasioned the founding of the Churches to which he now writes.

In the scanty record (Acts 18:23) of Paul’s second visit, Galatia is put after Phrygia. And naturally so. For he was then (Acts 18:21) under promise to visit Ephesus: and for this it was most convenient to go from Lycaonia at once northward to Galatia, and then through Phrygia to Ephesus. About this second visit to Galatia we have no details. But from Galatians 5:21 we infer that then Paul found occasion for warnings against immorality.

That no city of Galatia is mentioned as visited by Paul, suggests that the Galatian Christians were not chiefly in one or other of the three large cities, but were scattered throughout the country. See under Galatians 1:2. We have not for the Epistle to the Galatians the definite notes of time and place which enabled us to determine approximately and with some confidence the date and place of the Epistles to the Romans and Corinthians. Such notes of time as we have, we shall discuss in Diss. iii., after our study of the Epistle itself.

The occasion and purpose of the Epistle are indicated plainly in Galatians 1:6, 7; 3:1; 4:11-20; 5:3; 6:12. Paul wrote to recall his converts from an error spreading among them, under the influence of men whom he carefully distinguishes from those to whom he writes. How serious was the error, we learn from the earnestness of the Epistle. Its exact nature can be discovered only from the Epistle itself. Our study of it must therefore be postponed to the close of our Exposition.

Dissertation 1. -- The Book of Acts Compared With the Epistle To The Galatians.

BEET_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 227

GALATIANS

DISSERTATION 1.

THE BOOK OF ACTS COMPARED WITH THE EPISTLE TO

THE GALATIANS.

1. That the Book of Acts was written by Luke, a companion of Paul, and that it contains a trustworthy narrative, we have already (Corinthians, Diss. ii.) found strong reason to believe, with the consecutive narrative there given, we will now compare the many personal notices in the Epistle to the Galatians.

2. The record in Acts 8:3; 9:1f is confirmed in Galatians 1:13f by the testimony of the persecutor himself; who also says that the motive of his earnestness was zeal for the traditions of his ancestors. The introductory word ye-have-heard is in remarkable agreement with Acts 22:4 and Acts 26:10, where we twice find Paul telling the story of his early life. The word paternal in Galatians 1:14 recalls a similar word from the lips of Paul in Acts 22:3; 24:14; 28:17. The paternal traditions are explained by his own declaration in Acts 23:6, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees. It pleased God to reveal His Son in me (Galatians 1:15f) is an exact inner counterpart of the event narrated in Acts 9:3-7: and in Acts 26:16-18 (cp. Acts 22:15) we have from the lips of the Risen Saviour the purpose stated in Galatians 1:16, that as good news I should announce him among the Gentiles. The conciseness of the narrative forbids us to say that Acts 22:17, although suggesting an earlier return to Jerusalem, actually contradicts Galatians 1:18, after three years. Whereas, that Paul went up from Damascus to Jerusalem, agrees with Acts 9:26. His motive, as stated in Galatians 1:18, does not contradict Acts 9:23ff. For, when compelled to leave Damascus, a desire to see Peter might suggest a journey to Jerusalem. That Paul remained there fifteen days, agrees well with the indefinite statements in Acts 9:30; 22:18. On the other hand, that after three years Paul was (Acts 9:26) an object of suspicion to the apostles at Jerusalem and that they needed to be told by Barnabas how in the way he had seen the Lord, is a difficulty which I can neither deny nor solve. For the distance (140 miles) was not such as would delay for three years tidings that the man commissioned to bring Christians captive to Jerusalem had himself become a servant of Christ. Indeed the narrative of Acts 11:22 suggests that in much less time other good news reached Jerusalem from Antioch, a city more than twice as far away as Damascus. And the news from Antioch was not more likely to travel than was news of the conversion of the persecutor who was devastating the Church. But, be this as it may, the proved and unquestioned genuineness of the Epistle, and the importance of the argument involved in this three years’ delay, compel us to accept Paul’s statement that his next visit to Jerusalem was not till three years after his conversion. And, on the other hand, testing it merely by the principles of ordinary historical criticism, (and we have no other means of dealing with apparent contradiction in the narratives of Holy Scripture,) it is in the last degree unlikely that the beautiful story of Acts 9:26f is without foundation in fact. The key to the difficulty is lost in the scantiness of our materials. Perhaps among the many enemies of the early Church Saul was not actually so conspicuous as his subsequent career makes him in the pages of the Book of Acts. And possibly his seclusion in Arabia may have hid him from view of the Christians at Jerusalem. Or, is it possible that his pronounced rejection of the Mosaic Law as no longer binding had made the young convert less welcome to some of the Christian Jews of Damascus, and that they had reported of him somewhat unfavourably to companions of like mind at Jerusalem, where even among Christians (cp. Acts 21:20) the Law was held in excessive reverence; and that such reports caused suspicion there? In any case, this contradiction in a small detail cannot neutralise the many points of agreement. For such agreement can be accounted for only by supposing that the events recorded actually took place; whereas mistakes in detail are easily accounted for by the imperfection of human observation and research. We notice also that the contradiction refers to events of which apparently Luke was not an eye-witness.

That in Acts 9:27 Paul is said to have been brought to the Apostles, whereas he says in Galatians 1:19 that he saw only Peter and James, presents, in the indefiniteness of a popular narrative, no difficulty. By introducing him to Peter and perhaps to James, Barnabas introduced Paul to the apostolic band. That he did not see the others, as from his own solemn attestation we cannot doubt, must have had a cause; probably their absence from Jerusalem, engaged probably in work similar to that which (Acts 9:32) led Peter soon afterwards to Lydda, Joppa, and Caesarea. The mention of Cilicia in Galatians 1:21 agrees closely with the statement in Acts 9:30 that Paul went from Jerusalem to Tarsus, the capital of Cilicia: similarly, the mention of Syria accords with the labours at Antioch recorded in Acts 11:26. The order Syria and Cilicia presents no difficulty, and does not even suggest that Paul went to Tarsus by way of Antioch. For, during this long period he resided in both cities successively, and probably preached Christ in the surrounding districts: and therefore the countries are given in their geographical position viewed from Jerusalem. That Paul remained (Galatians 1:22) unknown to the Churches of Judaea, seems to contradict the statement in Acts 9:29 that he spoke boldly to the Hellenist Jews at Jerusalem. And the difficulty is not removed by supposing that the Churches of Judaea did not include that of Jerusalem. See my note. Moreover, it is difficult to find room in Paul’s biography for his own statement recorded in Acts 26:20 that after preaching first at Damascus he preached at Jerusalem and in all the country of Judaea. But the scantiness of our materials forbids us to infer that this last statement is necessarily incorrect. And, on the visit to Jerusalem recorded in Acts 9:26, possibly Paul’s earnestness to save others might bring him in contact almost exclusively with non-Christians, except that he was a close companion of Peter and James. These suggestions do not remove, but they somewhat lessen, the apparent contradictions. And the many coincidences are a clear proof of the general trustworthiness of the Book of Acts and of the genuineness of the Epistle to the Galatians.

3. The second visit to Jerusalem mentioned in this letter (Galatians 2:1) agrees with the visit recorded in Acts 11:30 inasmuch as in each case Barnabas is said to have been Paul’s companion. But we learn from Josephus (Antiq. xix. 8. 2, cp. Wars ii. 11. 6) that Agrippa, (called Herod in Acts 12:1,) who about this time and at Easter (Acts 12:3) put Peter in prison, died in the fourth year of Claudius, i.e. A.D. 44. This double statement in the consecutive and full narratives of the Jewish historian outweighs far the casual remark of the Roman historian Tacitus, in his Annals (bk. xii. 23) of A.D. 49, that Agrippa had recently died. Tacitus probably mistook for Agrippa his brother Herod king of Chalcis, who actually died at that time and was succeeded by the younger Agrippa, son of the king mentioned in Acts 12:1. Josephus also says (Antiq. xx.

5. 2,) that in the days of Cuspius Fadus, governor of Judaea after the death of Agrippa, “the great famine” happened there; doubtless the famine foretold (Acts 11:28) by Agabus. These notes of time fix approximately, almost to certainty, the date of the visit recorded in Acts 11:30. And they prove that it cannot have been the visit mentioned in Galatians 2:1. For even though we measure the fourteen years from Paul’s conversion, which is not the simplest exposition, our reckoning backwards from Easter A.D. 44 would carry back his conversion to an impossibly early date. On the other hand there are no collateral marks of identity of these visits to Jerusalem. Of each visit a definite purpose is stated: but the purposes are quite different. We have in Acts 9:30-12:25 no hint of serious conflict within the Church, as described in Galatians 2:4. And the terrible persecution then raging makes such conflict very improbable. It is also more likely that the demand in Acts 15:1 that the Gentiles be circumcised was made before, rather than after, a similar demand in the case of Titus had been (Galatians 2:5) refused by the apostles at Jerusalem. Moreover, the pre-eminence of Paul among Gentile Christians assumed in Galatians 2:1-9 accords much better with his position in Acts 15:2, where his name is put before that of Barnabas, than in Acts 11:30 a year or two after Barnabas had brought him from Tarsus to Antioch.

The above difficulties compel us to seek for the visit referred to in Galatians 2:1 in Paul’s third visit as a Christian to Jerusalem, recorded in Acts 15:2ff. Again Barnabas is his companion. The occasion of the journey was a discussion at Antioch aroused by a demand that the Gentile converts be circumcised. And the travellers’ arrival at Jerusalem and their account of God’s work among the Gentiles evoked a similar demand there. But it was refused in a gathering of the Church, on the recommendation of Peter and James: and a letter disowning those who had taught the need of circumcision for Gentiles was drawn up at the bidding of the assembly and sent to Antioch. These many and essential coincidences assure us that Galatians 2:1ff and Acts 15:2ff refer to the same visit. If so, Titus, himself a noble specimen of the Gentile converts, was one of the certain others sent with Paul by the Church at Antioch. And if the choice were by Paul’s suggestion, this would easily account for his words in Galatians 2:1, taking with me also Titus. That Paul was moved to go by (Galatians 2:2) a divine revelation, made him not the less (Acts 15:2) a delegate of the Church at Antioch. Possibly a divine intimation to him suggested to the Church the mission to Jerusalem; or gave divine approval to a proposal already made. (Similarly, in Acts 9:30 and Acts 22:17 we have an outward occasion and divine guidance.) Paul’s eagerness (Acts 15:2) in the dispute at Antioch is explained by his consciousness, expressed in Galatians 2:2, that the success of the Gospel hung upon the matter in dispute. We can also well believe that his caution prompted him to secure in (Galatians 2:2) a private interview, before the public meeting described in Acts 15:6ff, the support of the leaders of the Church at Jerusalem. In that interview they assured him (Acts 15:9) of their concurrence: and in the assembly which followed (Acts 15:7ff) they publicly expressed it. But of this assembly it was needless for Paul to speak in his Epistle. For he is here proving his agreement with the other apostles, which was fully attested by their action at the private interview.

The only serious objection to this identification is that Galatians 2:1 suggests that Paul did not go up to Jerusalem until fourteen years after the above-mentioned visit. But this difficulty is not so great as the chronological difficulty, or impossibility, of supposing that Paul refers here to the visit recorded in Acts 11:30. Nor does it neutralise the many and close coincidences just noted. It would rather cast doubt on the historic correctness of Acts 11:30; 12:25. But the shortness of the record, and the persecution then raging, suggest that this visit was very short, affording perhaps little opportunity for intercourse with the apostles. And, if so, Paul may have passed over it in Galatians 2:1 as not bearing upon the matter in hand. For, his argument here rests, not on his absence from Jerusalem as it did in Galatians 1:17ff, but on the cordial agreement of the earlier apostles when after many years he met them there. The lapse of time is mentioned chiefly for chronological exactness. Certainly this suggestion is sufficient to warn us not lightly to cast doubt on the proved general accuracy of the Book of Acts.

It has been suggested (see an Excursus in Wieseler’s commentary) that the visit referred to in Galatians 2:1 is that suggested or implied in Acts 18:22; (the mention of Jerusalem in our A.V. is almost certainly spurious;) chiefly on the ground that in this Epistle Paul does not refer to the decree issued by the Conference although this decree was conclusive proof that the earlier apostles agreed with Paul and was given by Paul (Acts 16:4) to Churches on the border of Galatia and therefore probably also to the Churches of Galatia, and on the ground that the decree from Jerusalem differs somewhat (see below) from the teaching of Paul. But this suggestion involves insuperable difficulties. it is inconceivable that Paul would pass in silence over an event so important, and bearing so directly on the question at issue as the conference described in Acts 15:6ff. Nor can we conceive him laying before his colleages at Jerusalem, in the serious manner described in Galatians 2:2, the Gospel he preached after they had, three years before, publicly and formally expressed their agreement with it. Nor, on the other hand, is his silence about the decree in any way explained by supposing it to have been written three years before the visit here referred to, instead of immediately after it. In either case the decree bore directly on the matter under discussion: for it tacitly admitted that Gentile Christians need not be circumcised. Possibly, Paul refrained from mentioning it because, as we learn from 1 Corinthians 8:8; Romans 14:2ff, he could not support it as absolutely binding in all points, e.g. in its prohibition of meat sacrificed to idols. And whatever the decree contains touching the matter in hand was practically embodied in a fact which he states and which none could deny, viz. that Titus, Paul’s well-known companion, known probably in Galatia, had been received and recognised by the Church in Jerusalem, although uncircumcised, and in face of a protest from some members of the Church. This fact was decisive, apart from the decree. It is also quite possible that the apostles agreed entirely with Paul’s view even of idol-sacrifices and that the prohibition to eat them was a compromise for the sake of peace: cp. Acts 21:20ff. Certainly they agreed with him heartily in the matter under discussion in this Epistle, viz. the circumcision of Gentile converts. So conclusive is the evidence, that the identification here advocated is now almost universally accepted. And it seems to have been the earliest identification. We find it in Irenaeus, Heresies bk. iii. 13. 3. Moreover, the many coincidences which support this identification, amid differences which disprove copying of either account from the other, are no small proof of the genuineness of the Epistle and of the historical correctness of the Book of Acts.

4. The mention in Galatians 2:11 of Peter’s visit to Antioch, the only reference in Paul’s Epistles to the capital of Syria, is a very interesting coincidence with the position given to Antioch in Acts 11:20, 26; 14:26 as the mother-city of Gentile Christendom, and with the notice in Acts 15:35 that Paul and Barnabas spent some time there after their return from the conference at Jerusalem. And Peter’s unfaithfulness at Antioch under the influence of Jews lately come from Jerusalem, after his brave support of Paul in the conference there, is in exact accord with the instability depicted so vividly in the Gospels. Cp. John 18:10 with John 18:17, 25ff, and Matthew 14:29 with Matthew 14:30. The mention in Galatians 4:13 of a former visit of Paul to Galatia, implying a later visit, is a casual but remarkable agreement with the two visits mentioned in Acts 16:6 and Acts 18:23.

5. Of the Judaizing element in the Christian Church which evoked the Epistle to the Galatians, we have abundant evidence in the Book of Acts. We find it in the resistance to Peter at Jerusalem after the baptism of Cornelius, and in the contention with Paul both at Antioch and at Jerusalem after his first missionary journey. And in Acts 21:20ff witness is borne by James, the leader of the Church at Jerusalem, to the widespread suspicion and misrepresentation, among the Jewish Christians there, of Paul and his teaching. It was a counterpart within the Church of the uniform and intense hostility of the Jews to Paul wherever he went: cp. Acts 13:45, 50; 14:5, 19; 17:5; 18:12. Paul’s resistance to this Judaizing tendency is naturally less conspicuous in the simple narrative of the Book of Acts than in a letter written purposely to counteract it in a place in which it had become a deadly peril. But in Acts 15:2 the earnestness of Paul’s resistance is in a few words vividly depicted. And it is implied in the later misrepresentation at Jerusalem (Acts 21:21) of his teaching among the Gentiles.

Paul’s determined opposition to the circumcision of Titus seems at first sight inconsistent with Acts 16:3 where he is said to have circumcised Timothy because of the Jews. But that which was right to do, of his own accord in order to gain for Timothy access to Jews, i.e. to open and perhaps honest rejecters of Christ, might be wrong as a concession to a demand from false brethren teaching within the Church serious error. Moreover, whereas Titus was a Greek, Timothy had been reared by a Jewish mother. Consequently, his circumcision was not, as would have been that of Titus, an acknowledgment that the rite was universally binding. It was rather an exemplification of Paul’s own principle stated in 1 Corinthians 9:20, I became to the Jews as a Jew that I might gain Jews. For these would listen to a circumcised preacher of the Gospel much more readily than to one whom they looked upon as an apostate from Moses. Consequently, the statement in Acts 16:3 is no proof of the writer’s inaccuracy.

6. A very important doctrinal coincidence with the Epistle to the Galatians is Acts 13:38, 39, where we read that in Christ every one who believes is justified and thus obtains forgiveness of sins in a way impossible by the Law of Moses. These two verses are a concentrated embodiment of the teaching of the Epistle to the Galatians. This coincidence is the more remarkable because no writer in the New Testament except Paul speaks of justification by faith, and nowhere else except Luke 18:14 do we read of justification as a present enjoyment.

7. The notes of time collected above, we will now endeavour to connect, reckoning backwards, with the dates determined in Diss. iii. of my Corinthians. We there found reason to believe that Paul was at Ephesus (cp. Acts 20:31) from A.D. 55 to the spring of A.D. 58. It is therefore probable that in the spring of A.D. 55, the most likely time of year for beginning a journey, he started from Antioch (Acts 18:23) on his third missionary tour. The some time spent at Antioch would doubtless include the winter of A.D. 54. And the journey described in Acts 18:18-22 may well have been accomplished during the summer; allowing us to suppose that Paul sailed from Corinth for Syria in the spring of the same year. If so, his sojourn at Corinth of more than eighteen months (Acts 18:11) would include two winters and the intervening summer: i.e. he arrived there in the autumn of A.D. 52. And, since on that journey, his second missionary tour, he was detained in Galatia by illness and founded Churches there, we must suppose that he started from Antioch in the early spring. But before starting on this journey Paul spent some time (Acts 15:35f) at Antioch; during which time Peter came, and others from Jerusalem. This brings the date of the conference at Jerusalem to the previous year, A.D. 51. Reckoning back fourteen years, Paul’s first visit to Jerusalem must have been in A.D. 37 or 38, and his conversion about A.D. 35.

The simplicity of this reckoning, and its agreement with all the known facts of the case, confirm somewhat the identification advocated above. The intervals stated in Galatians 1:18; 2:1 are almost our only reliable indications of the time of Paul’s conversion and of his first subsequent visit to Jerusalem. And the many coincidences here noted, of which the full force can be felt only by personal study, produce an irresistible conviction that we have before us a genuine letter of the great apostle, and in the Book of Acts a narrative, correct in the main, of his life and work. And this conviction is strengthened by the total absence in the Book of Acts of any mention of Paul’s sickness and labours in Galatia, and of the circumstances which occasioned this letter. But, unfortunately, our comparison of the two documents has not furnished us with any indication of the exact date of the Epistle. Some such indications, however, we shall find in our comparison of the Epistles to the Romans and the Corinthians.

Dissertation 2. -- The Epistles to the Corinthians and to the Romans Compared With That to the Galatians.

BEET_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 236

GALATIANS

DISSERTATION 2.

THE EPISTLES TO THE CORINTHIANS AND TO THE ROMANS

COMPARED WITH THAT TO THE GALATIANS.

1. In my Romans Introd. iv. 3 we found proof that the Epistle to the Romans was written later than those to the Corinthians. With these three Epistles, in the order of time, we will now compare the Epistle to the Galatians.

2. The absence of any references to matters of fact binding the Epistles together compels us to look for points of doctrinal contact. As in Galatians 4:19 so in 1 Corinthians 4:15; 2 Corinthians 6:13; 12:14 Paul remembers that his readers, though unfaithful, are his own spiritual children. Amid the various matters dealt with in order in 1 Corinthians, the one matter which engrosses attention in the Epistle to the Galatians finds casual but full expression in 1 Corinthians 7:19, circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but a keeping of the commandments of God; almost the words which in Galatians 6:15 sum up the teaching of the Epistle. The phrase under law in Galatians 3:23; 4:4, 5, 21; 5:18 reappears in 1 Corinthians 9:20, and in Romans 6:14, 15. And the term tutor or paedagogue, by which in Galatians 3:24 Paul describes the Law, is used by him, also as a metaphor, in 1 Corinthians 4:15. In 1 Corinthians 9:27, where Paul finds an antagonist in his own body, we have a very important, though casual, coincidence with the hostile influence attributed to the flesh in Galatians 5:17. The death of Christ occupies in all four Epistles the same unique place. And the word bought (with a price), conspicuously repeated in 1 Corinthians 6:20; 7:23, is found in a strengthened form in Galatians 3:13; 4:5. That Christ gave Himself for our sins, in Galatians 1:4, has a counterpart in 1 Corinthians 15:3, died for our sins: cp. Romans 4:25. The grace given to me in Galatians 2:9 recalls 1 Corinthians 3:10, ( 1 Corinthians 1:4; 2 Corinthians 8:1,) Romans 12:3, 6; 15:15. The divine call in 1 Corinthians 1:9, 24, 26, so conspicuous in 1 Corinthians 7:15-24 and in Romans 8:28, 30; 9:11, 24; 11:29, reappears in Galatians 1:6, 15; 5:8, 13. The phrase ye are Christ’s unites Galatians 3:29 to 1 Corinthians 3:23; 2 Corinthians 10:7: and the remarkable words known by God are common to 1 Corinthians 8:3 and Galatians 4:9. Similar lists of sins occur in 1 Corinthians 6:9; 5:11; 2 Corinthians 12:20; Romans 1:29; Galatians 5:19. In two of these (also 1 Corinthians 15:50) we have the conspicuous phrase shall not inherit the kingdom of God: cp. Galatians 4:30. The words be not deceived in Galatians 6:7 are also in 1 Corinthians 6:9; 15:33. The sowing and reaping of Galatians 6:7-9 recall a metaphor in 1 Corinthians 9:11; 2 Corinthians 9:6. The repeated Anathema in Galatians 1:8, 9 recalls the same word in 1 Corinthians 16:22; 12:3. The motto a little leaven leavens the whole lump in Galatians 5:9 occurs word for word in 1 Corinthians 5:6.

3. With 2 Corinthians, owing to a closer similarity of circumstances, the Epistle to the Galatians presents points of still closer contact. Of these two Epistles, the whole of the latter and part of the former were written, in anxiety relieved by rays of hope, (2 Corinthians 12:20; 11:3; 10:6; 7:16: Galatians 4:11, 20; 5:10,) to guard beloved children in Christ (2 Corinthians 12:14; Galatians 4:19) against the false teaching of Jewish Christians who had gained influence among them. These advocates of Judaism, Paul speaks of in each case in the third person, thus pointedly separating them from his readers: cp. 2 Corinthians 10:2, 12; 11:5, 12f,2 Corinthians 11:22 with Galatians 1:7; 4:17; 5:10, 12; 6:12f. The false teachers in Galatia (Galatians 1:7; 5:10, 12) desired to overturn the Gospel and were upsetting the members of the Church: and certainly no less could be said of those at Corinth who are called in 2 Corinthians 11:15 ministers of Satan. Indeed, the other Jesus and other kind of Gospel in 2 Corinthians 11:4 are supplemented and explained by Galatians 1:6f. Each set of seducers was influenced by concealed and selfish motives: 2 Corinthians 11:12f; Galatians 4:17; 6:13. And upon each will punishment fall: 2 Corinthians 11:15; Galatians 5:10. But Paul’s words allow us to hope that the Judaizers in Galatia were less openly hostile to himself and less wicked than those at Corinth. In contrast to these deceivers, to whom he says nothing and for whom he seems to have had no hope, Paul addresses to his readers in each case earnest and direct appeal. (Galatians 4:12 is in its spirit a close parallel to 2 Corinthians 6:11-7:4; 11:1f.) And for these he cherishes a measure of hope. But the degree of hope differs greatly in the two Epistles. The severity threatened at Corinth is only for a part of the Church which has fallen into immorality: of the Church as a whole he speaks (2 Corinthians 7:16) with strong confidence. Against the Galatians he brings no direct charge of immorality. But the entire Church was wandering away from the faith which unites men to Christ. And the gloom which covers Paul’s letter is relieved by only one or two rays of hope: Galatians 5:10; 6:16. It is worthy of note that against some at Corinth (2 Corinthians 10:2; 13:2, 10) Paul threatens severity, waiting only till the mass of the Church be fully restored: against the Galatian Christians we have no threatening, but fear (Galatians 4:11) lest Paul’s work among them be in vain. These various points of similarity and difference, both in his opponents and in his treatment of them, are proofs that on the pages of these Epistles is reflected actual church-life.

A very close parallel to 2 Corinthians 5:21 is Galatians 3:13: and a new creature is found only in Galatians 6:15 and 2 Corinthians 5:17.

4. Coming now to the Epistle to the Romans we notice, along with coincidences common to the Epistles to the Corinthians, numerous other coincidences of an altogether different kind. All the more conspicuous thoughts in the Epistle to the Galatians find counterparts in that to the Romans. The same doctrines are again and again stated in the same words, and defended by similar arguments. And doctrines and arguments concise almost to obscurity in the one Epistle are explained and supplemented in the other. This similarity has no parallel in the letters attributed to Paul except, though in less degree, in the Epistles to the Ephesians and the Colossians. It has also a parallel in the Gospel and First Epistle of John.

5. The First of the Five Fundamental Doctrines of the Epistle to the Romans, viz. that God accepts as righteous all who believe the Gospel, (see under Romans 3:22,) is the chief matter of the Epistle to the Galatians. And in each Epistle the doctrine is stated in the same words, justified by faith. Cp. Galatians 2:16; 3:8, 24 with Romans 3:24, 26, 28, 30; 5:1. This is the more remarkable because elsewhere in the New Testament this phrase is found only in Acts 13:39 where we have recorded words of Paul: and justification as present and actual, only in 1 Corinthians 6:11; Titus 3:7, and in Luke 18:14. As in Romans 3:27ff so in Galatians 2:16 it is stated emphatically that justification is not by works of law; and in Ga 3:, as in Ro 4: the teaching that men are justified by faith is defended by an argument based on God’s covenant with Abraham. With the doctrine of Justification by Faith is interwoven in each Epistle an exposition of the purpose and operation of the Law, and of a believer’s relation to it. The Law proclaims a universal curse, and was designed to lead to transgressions and thus to shut up all men into helpless bondage from which they can be saved only by justification through faith: Galatians 3:10, 19, 22f. It speaks in order to place all men guilty and silent at the bar of God; and came in that the first transgression might multiply, thus working wrath: Romans 3:19f; Romans 5:20; 4:15. But the man of faith is dead to the Law: Galatians 2:19; Romans 6:14. The essential principle of law, asserted in Leviticus 18:5, reveals the total difference between salvation by law and by faith: Galatians 3:12; Romans 10:5. But that in this important matter the Epistles are by no means copies, is seen both in different ways of stating the same doctrine and in the various arguments with which it is defended. Of this, the exposition of Abraham’s faith is a good example. The argument in Romans 4:10f that circumcision was later than the faith reckoned for righteousness finds a more fully developed counterpart in Galatians 3:15, 17, where it is greatly strengthened by reference to human covenants. That the Law (Romans 4:14f) works wrath, and therefore would rob the promise of results if heirship came through law, is pleaded practically in Galatians 3:10 and supported by a quotation from Deuteronomy 27:26; Romans 9:8f is a summing up of the argument developed in Galatians 4:21-31, where we have again the son born after the flesh and the children of promise. The bondage caused by the Law, as the purpose of the Law is expounded in Galatians 3:21ff, finds graphic delineation in Romans 7:14-25. In Galatians 3:1-5 an argument from the story of Abraham is prefaced by an appeal to the early religious life of the readers; an appeal very appropriate to a writer who led them to Christ, but necessarily absent from a letter to the Roman Christians whom the writer had never seen.

6. The second chief matter of the Epistle to the Galatians, the contrast of the flesh and the Spirit as the two motive principles of human conduct, is equally conspicuous in the Epistle to the Romans. Cp. Galatians 5:16, 25 with Romans 8:4; Galatians 5:18 with Romans 8:14; Galatians 5:24 with Romans 7:6; Galatians 6:8 with Romans 8:13. And in this important doctrine also each Epistle supplements the other. In Romans 7:14-25 (cp. members of my body twice in Romans 7:23) we have a vivid picture of the mutual hostility asserted in Galatians 5:17. The crucifixion of the flesh in Galatians 5:24 explains the crucifixion of the old man in Romans 6:6. The contrasted harvests of Galatians 6:8 are a counterpart to Romans 6:21f: cp. Romans 6:12.

This moral contrast of flesh and Spirit is found elsewhere in the New Testament only perhaps in John 3:6. But in a different, though related, sense, flesh and spirit are contrasted in 1 Corinthians 5:5; 2 Corinthians 7:1. And the phrase according to flesh, so conspicuous in Romans 8:4f, 12f, (cp. Galatians 4:23, 29,) is found in 2 Corinthians 1:17; 10:2f; and in the same sense.

Both in Romans and Galatians the moral teaching of the Mosaic Law is summed up in the words of Leviticus 19:18.

7. Although in all four Epistles now under comparison the Death of Christ upon the Cross occupies the same unique place as the means of our salvation, yet the remarkable phrases crucified with Christ, crucified to the world, and have crucified the flesh, in Galatians 2:20; 6:14; 5:24, compared with our old man is crucified in Romans 6:6, link together these two Epistles even as compared with the other Epistles of Paul. See Diss. vii. Not only are these phrases peculiar to Paul, but they belong to an important realm of thought peculiar to him and permeating his entire conception of the believer’s relation to Christ, viz. union with Christ in His death, burial, resurrection and enthronement. Cp. Ephesians 2:5f; Colossians 2:20, 11-13; 2 Timothy 2:11. This mode of viewing Christ’s relation to us is not only absent from other New Testament writers, but, in spite of the great influence exerted by the teaching of Paul, has been assimilated only to a very small extent by later writers. Its conspicuous prominence in this Epistle is a clear mark of common origin with Romans 6:3-11.

Other slighter points of contact of the two Epistles are fulness of time in Galatians 4:4 with in due season in Romans 5:6: the words adoption, Abba Father, and son and heir in Galatians 4:5ff with Romans 8:15ff: pronouncing blessed in Galatians 4:15 and Romans 4:6: bear others’ burdens in Galatians 6:2; Romans 15:1.

8. Very instructive, as revealing the close relation of these four Epistles, and especially of those to the Romans and Galatians, is their use of the Old Testament. Even in the Epistles to the Corinthians, written to Gentiles and not treating specially of the Old Covenant, we have already found (see my Corinthians p. 491) abundant proof of the writer’s deep familiarity with the Jewish Scriptures. And in the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians we have the same Scriptures quoted, and expounded in a similar, though quite independent, manner. Each Epistle appeals to the story of Abraham, taking as a text Genesis 15:6; also quotes Habakkuk 2:4, and as contrast Leviticus 18:5. A link uniting Galatians 2:16 with Psalm 143:2 is Romans 3:20. In Galatians 5:14 as in Romans 13:9; Leviticus 19:18 is quoted as a chief foundation-stone of Christian morality. The allegory of Galatians 4:22-31 is an expansion of the concise argument in Romans 9:8f.

9. The force of the above coincidences of language and of thought can be felt only by careful personal study. To be appreciated, the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians should first be compared; then these two Epistles with those to the Corinthians and with others bearing the name of Paul; and lastly, all these with the other parts of the New Testament. Such comparison will afford abundant indications that the four Epistles are from the same pen, and thus confirm the unanimous belief of all Churches in the latter part of the second century that they were written by the Apostle Paul; and will remove all possibility of doubt that the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians are products of the same mind and heart. And, if so, the various and irresistible evidence which compelled us to believe that each of the other three Epistles was written by Paul proves that the Epistle to the Galatians is also his work. These coincidences thus supply the lack of the personal notices which are so important a part of the evidence of authorship of the other Epistles. They complete the proof of genuineness of the Epistle to the Galatians, a proof accepted as conclusive in all ages both by those who accept and those who reject the teaching of the great Apostle.

The close similarity of thought and expression also suggests that the two Epistles so closely related, viz. those to the Romans and the Galatians, were written under the same circumstances and about the same time. This matter now demands our attention.

Dissertation 3. -- The Date of the Epistle to the Galatians.

BEET_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 243

GALATIANS

DISSERTATION 3.

THE DATE OF THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS.

1. In my volume on Corinthians (p. 494) {Diss. iii. 8.} and that on Romans (p. 20) {see Index to Romans Intro. Section 4.} we found satisfactory proof that to the Corinthians Paul wrote from Ephesus at Easter and from Macedonia during the summer following, and to the Romans from Corinth during the next winter, the winter previous to his arrest at Jerusalem. Consequently, the three Epistles were written within a year.

2. From Galatians 4:13 we inferred (see p. 124) that when writing the letter now before us Paul had already twice visited Galatia. And the narrative of the Book of Acts made us almost certain that these were the visits mentioned in Acts 16:6; 18:23. Consequently, the Epistle was written not earlier than Paul’s third missionary journey. From Galatia Paul passed (Acts 19:1) to Ephesus, where he spent three years. This long sojourn within 300 miles of Galatia by a direct route suggests that during this time Paul received unfavourable tidings about his converts there and at once wrote this letter to stop if possible the incipient apostacy. If so, this apostacy must have taken place soon after his second visit to Galatia. And this is somewhat confirmed by the word quickly in Galatians 1:6. This suggestion would also allow us to account for Paul’s silence about the collection for Jerusalem by supposing that this letter was written before he took it in hand and gave ( 1 Corinthians 16:1) directions about it to the Churches of Galatia. For these reasons many writers have accepted Paul’s sojourn at Ephesus as the date of the Epistle. They therefore place it more than a year before the Epistle to the Romans.

3. Internal evidence points to a later date. The close similarity both of doctrine and argument, noted above, in the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians reveals intense and sustained thought on one chief and one secondary topic, viz. Justification by Faith as Abraham was justified, and the flesh and Spirit as opposing factors of human life. Now the mental versatility of Paul makes it somewhat unlikely that these topics would occupy the prominent place in his thought which we find them holding in these Epistles, for a space of more than a year. And it is almost inconceivable that, during such period of sustained and concentrated thought, the two Epistles to the Corinthians, in neither of which we find any clear trace of these great doctrines, could have been written. The analogy of the similarly related Epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians, which seem (Ephesians 6:21; Colossians 4:7) to have been carried by the same messenger, Tychicus, suggests almost irresistibly that the Epistles to the Galatians and Romans were also written about the same time.

To this suggestion there is no serious objection. For, the word quickly in Galatians 1:6 is a relative term. To one whose every thought reached forward into eternity, seven or ten years would seem a very short time: see my note. The apostacy, apparently of whole Churches, may indeed have seemed to Paul a wonderfully early desertion of the faith so eagerly embraced. Again, although tidings from Galatia would much more easily reach Ephesus than Corinth whence Paul wrote to the Romans, yet communication between these two great seaports in the same latitude on opposite coasts of the Ægean Sea, was not difficult. Consequently, news reaching the Church at Ephesus might soon travel to Corinth. A greater difficulty is Paul’s silence about the collection for Jerusalem. But our ignorance of details forbids us to base upon it a confident argument. Possibly the collection was already made: or, the unfaithfulness of the Church may have disinclined Paul to press it. Certainly these difficulties are less than the difficulty of supposing that the Epistles to the Corinthians were written between those to the Romans and the Galatians. On the other hand, if when Paul wrote this letter he had been lately engaged with a collection for poor Christians at Jerusalem, this may have called to his mind a promise made at Jerusalem many years before, and have prompted the somewhat unexpected reference to it in Galatians 2:10. And his joyful meeting with Titus (2 Corinthians 7:6) in Macedonia, and probably the presence of Titus at Corinth during the winter following, would bring back to his mind the effort made at Jerusalem to compel Titus to be circumcised and Paul’s own determined resistance to it.

4. Assuming now that the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians were written about the same time, we will further compare them with a view to their order in time. The chief argument of the latter Epistle was prompted by an emergency, the defection of the Galatian Christians: and the great doctrine thus forced by circumstances upon Paul’s most serious attention becomes in the Epistle to the Romans the foundation stone of a complete and compact exposition of the Gospel. This suggests that the Epistle to the Galatians was earlier than that to the Romans. In the former Epistle, Justification by Faith is the one doctrine discussed and defended at length: in the latter, it is the first of several doctrines fully expounded, and set forth in their mutual relations.

The easiest explanation of the whole case is that the exposition of Justification by Faith was evoked, as during the ages of Christianity statements of truth have again and again been evoked, by errors prevalent in Galatia, and was embodied roughly but forcefully, under pressure of the emergency, in the Epistle to the Galatians; and was afterwards worked up, in the mature thought of the Apostle, into the finished structure we see in the Epistle to the Romans. And the absence of this doctrine from the Epistles to Corinth suggests that when they were written Paul had not received the bad news from Galatia. We may suppose that on his arrival at Corinth in the autumn after the tumult at Ephesus he received news that under the influence of Jewish Christians residing in or visiting Galatia the entire Christian community there had wandered from the pure Gospel of Christ; that the news evoked in him, doubtless from materials already existing, the train of thought embodied in Galatians 3:1-5:6; that this doctrinal teaching found a needful supplement in the moral teaching of Galatians 5:13-6:10, suggested possibly by the sensuality existing in the Church at Corinth; and that when the intended journey of Phoebe to Rome a month or two later gave Paul an opportunity of writing to the Christians there, in the absence of any special matter needing discussion in his letter, he developed, on the basis of the exposition sent to the Galatians of the great doctrine of Justification by Faith, the orderly system of Christian teaching which remains to us in the Epistle to the Romans. We may, therefore, in the absence of direct notes of time, such as those which enabled us to fix with approximate exactness the time and place of the Epistles to the Romans and the Corinthians, accept as probable that Paul wrote the letter before us at the close of A.D. 57, (according to the reckoning adopted in Diss. iii. of my Corinthians,) shortly after his arrival among his beloved yet wayward converts in the great and corrupt city of Corinth. Unfortunately, upon the state of the Church there this Epistle casts no light. The writer’s entire thought is occupied by his spiritual children in far-off Galatia.

5. The Epistles bearing Paul’s name arrange themselves in four very definite groups: the Epistles to the Thessalonians, written on his second missionary journey, being separated by some five or six years from the Epistles to the (Corinthians and Romans, written on his third journey; and these again separated by an interval of years from the Epistles to the Ephesians, Colossians, and Philemon, and from the probably earlier Epistle to the Philippians, all written during his first great imprisonment; the closely related, and still later, Epistles to Timothy and Titus forming a fourth group. Each of these groups is marked by internal characteristics uniting the letters which compose it, and confirming certain notes of time which indicate their chronological order. The Epistle to the Galatians belongs to the second group; a conclusion placed beyond doubt by its close relation in tone and feeling to the Epistles to the Corinthians, and its still closer relation in teaching and argument to the Epistle to the Romans, this confirming the casual note of time in Galatians 4:13 which separates the Epistle to the Galatians from those to the Thessalonians, and confirmed by the absence of all reference to captivity, (contrast Ephesians 3:1; 4:1; 6:20,) which suggests that it was earlier than the arrest at Jerusalem. This grouping of the Epistles notes theological differences; and is therefore far more important than the mere time and place at which each Epistle was written. And it rests upon a solid basis as indisputable fact.

Dissertation 4. -- The Epistle of James Compared With That to The Galatians.

BEET_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 247

GALATIANS

DISSERTATION 4.

THE EPISTLE OF JAMES COMPARED WITH THAT TO THE

GALATIANS.

1. The Epistle of James presents, especially in one passage, a contrast to the Epistle to the Galatians so marked that our exposition of the teaching of Paul would be incomplete without a discussion of this apparently contradictory teaching. We shall therefore begin our comparison by attempting to expound this specially difficult passage.

2. That James speaks (James 1:2, 3) of his readers’ manifold temptations as a proving of their faith, implies that faith lies at the root of the Christian life. It is, in contrast to doubt, the condition (James 1:6) of successful prayer: cp. James 5:15. The personal object of this faith is (James 2:1) our Lord Jesus Christ. James warns his readers that it must not be accompanied by respect of persons, which is contrary to the royal law Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.

In James 2:14 James unexpectedly introduces, by three questions, a series of arguments to prove that faith is useless if not accompanied by works. His first question assumes that faith is designed to be a means of profit; Cp. 1 Corinthians 15:32: his second implies that the profit looked for is salvation. This last can be no other than rescue from the eternal penalty of sin: cp. James 5:20; 4:12; 1:21. For, rescue from the present power of sin would lie outside the vision of one who trusted to faith without works. If a man say that he has faith, leaves open the question whether there can be actual faith without works. But this is admitted in the second question; and in James 2:19.

3. The third question, in James 2:15, 16, involves the first argument of the series. Its close bearing on James 2:14a is indicated by the words and one say and what is the profit? The picture of a man, and still more a woman, and these members of the Christian family, shuddering in the cold and unable to obtain daily bread, yet receiving from those to whom they look for help only empty words of sympathy, forces upon us the universal truth that worthless are all dispositions of the heart which instead of producing action reveal themselves only in words. And this conviction is strengthened by the indignation the picture arouses. By quoting a case in which faith is not mentioned James bases his argument on a broad principle of various application. This wider principle he brings to bear in James 2:17 on the specific matter in hand, viz. faith, by declaring that this vain sympathy finds a parallel in faith if it have no works. And the felt equality of mere words of sympathy and a mere profession of faith compels us to admit that his assertion is just.

The logical result of this first argument, James embodies in the word dead; in close accord with the same word in Romans 7:8, apart from law sin is dead. Of life, activity and power are constant marks: consequently, compassion and faith which produce nothing but empty words may be justly called dead.

Second argument: James 2:18. A man who expects salvation through faith without works is in the anomalous position of being unable to reply to any one he may meet who challenges proof of his profession of faith; and appears in ludicrous contrast to a man who, while making this challenge, appeals to his own works as witnesses of his faith.

A third argument (James 2:19) is that faith without moral results is found also in the demons, working in them awful fear, but evidently powerless to save. That God is One, is given as object-matter of the faith of the man who has no works. And assurance of this truth is called faith: thou believest. See my Romans, p. 142. {Romans 4:25} But this faith is shared by demons; and indisputably does not profit them. It is true that the object-matter of it is only a statement about the nature of God, whereas the object-matter of justifying faith is the promise of eternal life to all who believe the Gospel. The one is belief of what God is; the other, of what He will do to us who believe. This latter faith is impossible to demons: for to them no promise is made. But this distinction James does not think fit to notice. For, the faith which produces no moral results always shrinks into mere belief of what God is. The Law spoken from Sinai and re-echoed in every man’s heart prevents those who live in sin from believing the Gospel promise of God’s favour and eternal life. And the universal congruity in the kingdom of God between a condition and the result dependent upon it assures us that a faith shared by lost spirits cannot save.

4. Fourth argument: James 2:20-24. The stately introduction in James 2:20 marks suitably the transition from the casual arguments of James 2:16-19 to an important exposition of Scripture. That faith without works is barren (R.V.) or better without-result or literally without-works, (same word in Matthew 12:36; 20:3, 6; 1 Timothy 5:13; Titus 1:12; 2 Peter 1:8: cognate word in Galatians 3:17; 5:4, 11; Romans 3:3, 31; 4:14; Luke 13:7,) although it is a play upon words, is yet no truism but an all-important truth. For (cp. your work of faith, 1 Thessalonians 1:3) the works are actions prompted by faith now: the expected result of faith is (cp. profit and save in James 2:14) rescue from the future penalty of sin. James declares that a faith which produces no result now will produce none hereafter. And his collocation of words does much to confirm their truth.

The question of James 2:21 is practically an assertion that Abraham was justified by works, supported by an appeal to the story of the sacrifice of Isaac. To this story we must turn to learn the sense here of the word justified. For upon this depends the whole argument. In our search for it, the close similarity of the Epistle of James to the First Gospel affords a valuable clue. For in Matthew 12:37 the words justify and condemn denote the final awards of the Day of Judgment. And we are told that these awards will be determined even by a man’s words. Here then we have practically justification by works, (for a man’s words belong to his outer life, i.e. to his works,) in the Gospel which in thought and tone stands nearest to the Epistle of James.

Since justification is a judge’s favourable decision, we must look in Ge 22: for an utterance of the Great Judge. We find it in the solemn words of Genesis 22:16-18, where God declares that, because Abraham has offered Isaac in sacrifice, He will fulfil the promises made to him years before. This declaration in his favour, Abraham obtained, undoubtedly, by works, viz. by his surrender of his son. In this sense then he was justified by works. Now Genesis 15:6 teaches that the covenant with God, of which the great promises in Genesis 22:16-18 were the chief matter, was obtained by Abraham’s faith. Consequently, Abraham obtained the blessings of the Covenant both by faith and by works. We see then that faith wrought along with his works.

The precise relation between these two co-operative causes, James describes by saying that by works faith was made perfect: i.e. (see under 2 Corinthians 11:15) from the offering of Isaac Abraham’s faith derived its consummation, the attainment of its goal, the outworking of its inherent tendencies into full practical results. This great sacrifice was an outflow (cp. Hebrews 11:17) of Abraham’s daring assurance long before Isaac was born that God will fulfil His promise and give him children as numerous as the stars. So wonderful was this faith that it must needs have a visible, and permanent, and worthy monument. Such monument was erected in the trial which revealed, by an act of obedience, the immovable strength of Abraham’s assurance that God will fulfil His promise. And, appropriately, the trial took hold of the immediate object of Abraham’s faith, viz. the child of promise. Without this outward trial something would have been lacking to the full development of Abraham’s inward faith. And, since Abraham’s faith was recorded in Genesis 15:6, this Scripture was fulfilled, i.e. was realised in fact, in the sacrifice of Isaac. This makes apparent to all (ye see) the general principle that the approving award of the great Judge is obtained only by a faith associated with works. For, other faith is imperfect. And Abraham is both the father and the forerunner of all believers: consequently, since the blessings promised to him were obtained by a faith which had been tested by works, it is reasonable to infer that the eternal life promised in the Gospel can be obtained only by a faith similarly tested.

Exactly similar is the case of Rahab, which James adds to that of Abraham. That faith was the animating principle of her action, is proved by her profession of faith in Joshua 2:11. But the belief which in demons is without result moved her to receive the messengers at her own great peril, and thus rescue them from death. Certainly the faith of Rahab was accompanied by works. The similar reference to Rahab in Hebrews 11:31 suggests that her case, as also that of Abraham, was frequently quoted in the early Church as an example of faith. That her faith was accompanied by works, is so clear that it needed not to be proved by any such argument as that in James 2:22, 23 about Abraham.

5. James 2:26 does not necessarily imply that faith bears to works a relation similar to that of the body to the spirit. For the chief thought here is separation: apart from spirit, apart from works. United, the body and spirit are alive: separated, the body is dead. And from the felt worthlessness of compassion without practical help and of profession not verified by corresponding action, from the example of lost spirits who have as much faith as those who trust to faith without works, and from two favourite Old Testament examples of faith, James has proved that separated from works faith is like a human body destitute of life. This mention of a lifeless body suggests the moral corruption which follows empty profession of faith.

The argument is now clear. A faith utterly unlike the faith of Abraham and Rahab, and precisely the same as the powerless faith of lost spirits, cannot save a soul from death, and is therefore of no profit whatever.

6. Comparison of the above teaching with that of Paul reveals at once his different use of the word justify; or rather reminds us that he uses it in a sense found in the rest of the New Testament only in Luke 18:14, viz. as already possessed on earth. And this is no mere verbal peculiarity; but embodies an important conception of truth peculiar to Paul. James teaches that the favourable award of the Great Judge on the Great Day proclaiming salvation from the due penalty of sin of which all men are guilty is given only to those whose faith, like Abraham’s, has revealed itself in actual obedience; and that in this sense a man is justified by works and not by faith only. Even Paul, when speaking only of the Law and before mention of the Gospel, himself uses in Romans 2:13 similar language. But Paul saw that the Gospel is as much a voice of the Great Judge as will be the final award from the great white throne. We need not wait till that Day to know our destiny. Christ has already declared that all who believe His words shall have, and have already, eternal life. He thus proclaims their actual and present justification. And they have been justified (Romans 3:28) by faith apart from works. For as soon as they believe, even before their faith has had time to show itself in works, they are accepted by God as righteous, adopted into His family, and in token thereof receive the Holy Spirit crying in their hearts Abba, Father. The Spirit thus received breathes into their faith life and power and activity: whereas apart from the Spirit their faith would be powerless. The Holy Spirit, hidden in the heart, bears fruit; and reveals His presence in works of faith. But these works are a result, not a previous condition, of justification. And the end is eternal life. Should these results not follow justification, or should they cease, the grieved Spirit will depart and faith will shrink into the empty and powerless form described by James. Paul therefore declares, in close agreement with the teaching of James, emphatically and repeatedly ( 1 Corinthians 6:10; Galatians 5:21) that they who commit sin will not inherit the Kingdom of God. From this we infer that good works, the fruit of the Spirit, though by their nature and origin they cannot be a condition of first obtaining the preliminary justification on earth, are yet a condition of its permanence and of its consummation in the final justification on the Great Day.

7. It is now evident that between James and Paul there is no essential contradiction. But the point of view is altogether different. We cannot conceive either of them to write as the other has done.

In order to give a firm ground of hope even to those who like himself have been high-handed enemies of the Gospel, Paul proclaims pardon apart from works for all who believe. For a moral corrective of this doctrine he trusts to his teaching about the flesh and the Spirit, as in Galatians 5:16-6:10; and about the believer’s union with Christ in death to sin, thus being set free from deadly bondage, as in Rom. 6. On the other hand, in the mind of James, who all his life probably had endeavoured to serve God, the doctrine of forgiveness apart from works had not become an all-absorbing thought as in the mind of Paul: whereas intense consciousness of right and wrong made him evermindful that the practical worth of faith and of all religious or benevolent sentiment is measured by their practical effect upon our action. Paul could never forget that in the Gospel the Great Judge had already spoken the sinner’s acquittal. This acquittal, obtained by faith, he therefore called justification. James ever remembered that the new birth (James 1:18) by no means ends our probation, but rather begins a new probation; and that even the servants of Christ will be judged (James 2:12) at the (James 5:7) coming of the Lord. He therefore reserved the word justification for the Judge’s final approbation. In the Epistle of James the aspect of truth most familiar to him engrosses the writer’s thought so completely that the complementary truth underlying Paul’s phraseology is not mentioned. Consequently, although we find substantially in the many Epistles of Paul the teaching of James, we do not find in this one short Epistle the teaching which lay nearest to the heart of Paul. By proclaiming very forcibly that the Gospel does not revoke the unchanging principles of human morality, and by confining our attention to this one aspect of religion, leaving for the moment all else out of sight, the Epistle of James is of great and abiding value. But, had it stood alone, it would have done little or nothing to save those who are already conscious of the guilt and penalty of sin. Its value is almost exclusively that of a preparation and a corrective to the teaching of Paul and John. We notice that James does not speak of works of law, i.e. of the absolute conformity to its prescriptions which the Law demands. Such works no one can perform. He teaches merely that faith must reveal itself in action. Moreover, like Paul but unlike modern theologians, James does not discuss the psychological nature of saving faith as distinguished from faith which does not save. Such distinctions, though needful for the scientific theologian, only confuse seekers after salvation. It is sufficient for James to say that in order to save us faith must be accompanied by works.

8. The rest of the Epistle presents as compared with the writings of Paul no special difficulties. The Spirit which He made dwell in us in James 4:5 is a close coincidence with the constant teaching of Paul, e.g. 1 Corinthians 3:16. In James 2:5 we have the doctrine of election, in an aspect very similar to 1 Corinthians 1:27. The quotation of Leviticus 19:18 in James 2:8 is a close parallel with Galatians 5:14; Romans 13:9; and is a remarkable point of contact of James and Paul. It is a counterpart to Genesis 15:6, which is also quoted in the same three Epistles: James 2:23; Romans 4:3; Galatians 3:6. This suggests that these two passages from the Old Testament were frequently appealed to in the apostolic Church. And the former quotation confirms the correctness of Matthew 22:39; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27, where in the same sense as in these Epistles the same words are said to have been quoted by Christ. And, throughout, the Epistle of James strongly confirms the First Gospel by presenting a type of teaching identical with that recorded there as having fallen from the Master’s own lips.

Dissertation 5. -- The Gospel and First Epistle of John Compared With the Epistle to the Galatians.

BEET_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 254

GALATIANS

DISSERTATION 5.

THE GOSPEL AND FIRST EPISTLE OF JOHN COMPARED

WITH THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS.

1. Our comparison of the Epistle to the Galatians with that of James suggests a comparison with another very marked type of New Testament teaching, viz. that presented by the Gospel and First Epistle of John.

2. Very different from the conception of the work and teaching of Christ embodied in the other three Gospels is that delineated in the Fourth Gospel. And the First Epistle of John is a series of meditations on the words there recorded as spoken by Christ. The close similarity of these two documents removes all doubt that they are from the same pen. Various notices of persons and time suggest very strongly that the Gospel was written by an eye-witness of the scenes described. And the choice and arrangement of the words of Christ and the writer’s introductory and occasional remarks about Him, and his profound exposition in the First Epistle of the words recorded in the Gospel, reveal a mind and heart of the loftiest kind.

That both documents were written by the beloved disciple, is, although they are anonymous, assumed without a shadow of doubt in the latter part of the second century by Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, and Irenaeus, e.g. bk. iii. 1. 1, 16. 5-8; and is asserted in the Fragment of Muratori. And in still earlier writers we have less definite references. Whereas, no trace of doubt about their authorship is found in any early writer. Of this confident, wide-spread, and uncontradicted belief, in all parts of the Roman Empire within a hundred years of his death, the only explanation is that these works were actually written by the Apostle John. Moreover we cannot conceive a writer such as their author must have been hiding himself so completely that of his name or place or action no trace should survive. This unanimous belief finds for the Gospel and Epistle a worthy author; and for the disciple whom Jesus loved a worthy and abiding monument. The proofs of authorship, consisting as they do of minute particulars which cannot be reproduced in detail, are not so concise and therefore not so convincing at first sight as were the combined proofs, external and internal, historical and doctrinal, which forbad us to doubt that the four Epistles I have annotated are from the pen of Paul. Nor is there among modern scholars the same agreement about the authorship of these two works. But the cumulative force of the minute indications of authorship, taken in connection with the unanimous belief of the Early Church and with the proved genuineness of the four Epistles, is immense. That both documents were written by the Apostle John, is to me the only conceivable explanation of the whole facts of the case. The entire subject is discussed very ably in the contributions to The Speaker’s Commentary by Westcott and to The Cambridge Bible for Schools by Plummer, and in Godet’s Commentary on St. John’s Gospel. The authorship of the Book of Revelation is surrounded by special difficulties. And, as its type of teaching differs very much from that presented in the Gospel and First Epistle of John, I shall not bring it into the present comparison. Nor will it be needful to compare the short Second and Third Epistles of John, although we have good reason to believe that they were written by the author of the First Epistle.

3. We now consider the relation of faith to salvation in the Gospel and First Epistle of John. On the threshold of the Gospel we read that to those who believe Christ has given a right to become children of God: John 1:12. This implies that believers already possess the favour of the Great Judge. In John 3:15 and again in John 3:16 faith is, in the purpose of God, the single condition of eternal life. While others are (John 3:18) already condemned and (John 3:36) under the anger of God, against him that believes no sentence is pronounced, and he has eternal life. We are therefore emphatically told in John 5:24 that he has passed out of death into life. From John 5:22, 27 we infer that in giving life to believers Christ acts as Judge. In John 6:29 faith occupies a unique place as the one work which God requires in close accord with Romans 3:27, the law of faith. Similar teaching in John 6:35, 40,

47. In John 7:38f we have the astounding promise that from within those who believe, by the Holy Spirit given to them, will flow rivers of living water. They who do not believe will die in their sins: John 8:24. At the grave of Lazarus Christ taught with emphatic repetition that he who believes shall escape death: John 11:25, 26. Similarly, he that believes will perform works greater than those of the incarnate Son: John 14:12. Disbelief of Christ is the world’s great sin: John 16:9. Faith in Christ, and through faith eternal life, were the purpose for which the Fourth Gospel was written: John 20:31.

In 1 John 2:12 we find persons whose sins are already forgiven, who are already ( 1 John 3:1, 2) children of God, and ( 1 John 3:14: cp. John 5:24) have passed out of death into life. This is explained in 1 John 5:1, 4f, where we learn that all believers are begotten from God; and that faith involves victory over the world. The Epistle was written ( 1 John 5:13) to those that believe, that they may know that they have eternal life.

The above passages give to faith, as the one condition of eternal life, a place absolutely unique, and as conspicuous as its place in the Epistles of Paul. They involve also his doctrine of Justification by Faith; and they trace it in essence to the lips of Christ. For, the solemn declaration that all who believe have now eternal life, whereas formerly they were condemned and virtually dead, is the voice of the Judge, and is therefore a judicial decision in their favour; or is in other words their justification. By faith they entered the number of the justified. They are therefore already justified by faith. And although this phrase is not found in the writings of John it is suggested by John 5:21-30, where apparently Christ’s formal proclamation of life eternal for those who believe is called a raising of the dead, and this is said to be a judicial act.

This teaching is by John and by Christ guarded from abuse by the often repeated command that Christians love each other, and by the emphatic teaching of 1 John 3:9ff; John 8:39ff that sin and everything contrary to love are marks of the children of the devil and that the children of God are known by their works. Like 2 Corinthians 5:10; Romans 2:6, so John 5:29 announces a final judgment by Christ according to works.

The Holy Spirit is as prominent in the writings of John as in the Epistles of Paul. He is promised to those who believe in Christ; John 7:39. To Him is attributed, as in Galatians 4:6; Romans 8:8-16 so in 1 John 3:24; 4:13, the believer’s consciousness of spiritual life. He is the source of the new birth: John 3:3, 5, 8. And on the eve of His death Christ specially promised that in His disciples henceforth and for ever the Spirit should dwell, that His coming should be to them a return of the Risen Saviour and that He should guide them into all truth: John 14:16f, John 14:26; 15:26; John 16:7, 13f. A close agreement of Paul and John is their designation of believers as children of God: John 1:12; 11:52; 1 John 3:1f, 1 John 3:10; 5:2; In John, however, this new relation to God is traced to a new birth, as in John 1:13; 3:3-8; 1 John 5:1: a doctrine touched by Paul only once casually in Titus 3:5, but found in James 1:18; 1 Peter 1:23. On the other hand, Paul teaches that believers are sons of God by adoption, Romans 8:15; Galatians 4:5, 7; Ephesians 1:5; a Roman citizen thus using a common Roman custom to describe a new relation to God. To this teaching, John 1:12 is an approach. The phrase in Christ, which embodies as we have seen a profound and all-pervading thought in the mind of Paul, is equally conspicuous in the writings of John, where however it bears a very definite mark peculiar to the beloved disciple. And it is there traced to the Master’s lips. At Capernaum, after feeding the multitude, Christ spoke the mysterious words of John 6:56: He that eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. And after the last Supper, to the sorrowing apostles he said, in John 15:4, Abide in Me and I in you; explaining His words by pointing to the vine and its branches. The seed-thought thus uttered bore abundant fruit in the mind of one who on that memorable night lay on the bosom of His Lord; fruit found in 1 John 2:6, 24, 27, 28; 3:6, 24; 4:13, 16, and indirectly elsewhere. This coincidence of thought and expression is the more remarkable because this phrase, found in each Epistle bearing the name of Paul except the short letter to Titus and with a distinctive setting in the Gospel and First Epistle of John, is not found elsewhere in the New Testament.

4. The chief doctrinal features of the Epistle to the Galatians, we have now found, in form or in essence, equally conspicuous in the writings of John; and have there traced them to the lips of Christ. We have thus independent evidence from the two great theologians of the New Testament that these doctrines were actually taught by Christ. For only thus can we account for their firm hold of, and complete control over, men differing so widely in mental constitution, vocation, and surroundings, as Paul and the writer of the Fourth Gospel. This doctrinal coincidence is, therefore, proof that this Gospel is in the main a correct report of words spoken by Christ. Indeed, the discourses therein recorded are a necessary connecting link between Paul and Christ. For, only on the supposition that He spoke such words as these can we account for Paul’s conception of the Gospel. Had we only the discourses recorded in the First Gospel, this conception would be to us an insoluble mystery. But now all is explained. We can easily conceive that the Synoptic Gospels embody Christ’s ordinary public teaching, which was for the more part a reproduction and development of the moral teaching of the Old Testament. But together with this ordinary teaching He spoke, privately as to Nicodemus and to the apostles on the night of His betrayal, or occasionally in public as in the discourse (Joh 6.) at Capernaum, words setting forth the Gospel in its fulness. And the record of this teaching was appropriately confided to the beloved disciple. The teaching of the Synoptists was in some measure understood at the time, and is widely appreciated now. The words recorded by John could be understood, even by those who heard them, only when expounded by the Spirit promised to the disciples: and to this day the Fourth Gospel is a sealed book to many who value greatly the teaching of the other Gospels. But in all ages it has been the richest nourishment of the most devout of the followers of Christ. It will be noticed that the above argument confirms somewhat our other proof that the Fourth Gospel was written by the Apostle John. All this by no means implies that Paul derived his conception of the work and teaching of Christ from the Fourth Gospel or from the Apostle John; but simply that this Gospel reproduces correctly the thought of Christ. Through what channel this thought was by the Spirit of Christ conveyed to Paul, we cannot now determine. And, since we have found in the recorded teaching of Jesus the root of all that Paul teaches, the connecting medium is unimportant.

In close accord with the writings of Paul and John, and in spite of total dissimilarity of thought and phrase, we find faith occupying a unique place as the one condition of blessing in Luke 1:45; Mark 1:15; Luke 8:12f; Mark 16:16; and as an abiding condition of miraculous healing and of answer to prayer in Matthew 8:13; 9:28f; 17:20; Luke 17:6; Matthew 21:21f; Mark 11:23f. Of this teaching, the doctrine of Justification by Faith is but a full development.

Dissertation 6. -- Justification By Faith.

BEET_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 259

GALATIANS

DISSERTATION 6.

JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH.

1. We will now sum up and further discuss the results of our study of Paul’s doctrine of Justification by Faith, the chief matter of the Epistle to the Galatians.

2. We have already seen (Romans, p. 110) that the word justify denotes a judge’s award in a man’s favour. It is therefore used in Matthew 12:37 by Christ and in Romans 2:13 by Paul for the final approbation pronounced by the Great Judge on the Last Day. That this approbation will be given only to those who have done right, various New Testament writers agree: Matthew 7:21-27; 25:35; John 5:29; Romans 2:6; 2 Corinthians 5:10; Revelation 22:12. And, to prove this, is the purpose of the argument in James 2:14-26. In this sense then justification, i.e. the justification of the Great Day, will be by works, by actual right-doing. With this agree Genesis 22:16ff; Genesis 26:5, where the blessings of the Old Covenant are solemnly declared to be a reward of Abraham’s obedience.

3. In James 2:22 we learn from the case of Abraham that the works which justify are co-workers with faith: and are an outward realisation of faith. This implies that without faith. Abraham would not have performed the works which wrought his justification. Similarly, Paul teaches that by faith (Galatians 3:14) we obtain the Holy Spirit, and sonship (Galatians 3:26) attested by (Galatians 4:6) the gift of the Spirit of the Son; and that the Spirit then received gives (Romans 8:13) victory over sin, is the guide (Galatians 5:16) of our action, and a seed (Galatians 5:22) from which springs every moral excellence. Consequently, faith is the ultimate source on man’s side of the good works which will in the Great Day obtain the Judge’s approval, and of the justification then pronounced. Hence both faith and works are conditions, and in this sense means, of final justification. Compare the example of Rahab in the Epistle of Clement of Rome ch. i. 12, quoted in my Corinthians p. 521. {Appendix A}

4. Christ proclaimed again and again, as recorded in the Fourth Gospel, that all who believe in Him shall have, and already have, eternal life, and have passed out of death into life. And this proclamation He speaks of as an act of judgment. Our Lord thus gives to faith a unique place as the one means of the favour of God. Paul saw that this proclamation is a present justification of all who believe in Christ. These have no need to wait until the Great Day in order to know their destiny. In the words of the Gospel the Judge has already spoken to them, and in their favour. They are therefore already justified. And, since the proclamation is for all believers and for them only, by believing the words of Jesus they entered the number of those whom He declares to be justified. In other words they were justified by faith. Moreover, the proclamation availed for them in the moment they believed and before there had been time for faith to show itself in works. Otherwise, not all believers would have eternal life. They were therefore in the moment of their faith justified by faith apart from works. And this is repeatedly and expressly asserted by Paul. This present justification brings peace with God, and a joyous hope of future glory: Romans 5:1, 11.

5. We have therefore two justifications; one preliminary, the other final. The one is obtained by believing the words of Jesus: the other, by obeying the commands of God. But these justifications are most closely related each to the other. For the preliminary justification has no worth unless it be an anticipation of the final award. And the obedience required for that final award is an outflow of the faith which first brought justification. In each of these senses, in reference to a justification already enjoyed even by one who a moment before had confessed himself a sinner, and in reference to the justification of the Great Day which will be obtained by right-doing on earth, the word justify is used by Christ: Luke 18:14; Matthew 12:37.

With these two uses of the word justify correspond two very conspicuous threads of teaching which run almost throughout the New Testament. We are frequently taught, in plainest and most emphatic language, that only they who obey God have His favour and are in the way of life. So Matthew 7:21-27; 19:17; 25:35f, Matthew 25:42f; Romans 2:6f; 6:16, 23; 1 Corinthians 6:9f; 7:19; 2 Corinthians 5:10; Galatians 6:7f; John 8:39; 1 John 2:3-5, 9-11; 3:6-10, 14f; 1 John 5:3. And this teaching is re-echoed in our hearts by the law written there. It thus becomes a voice we cannot contradict or doubt. Yet in language equally emphatic Christ declares in the Fourth Gospel (see p. 211) that all who believe have eternal life, thus making faith the one condition of salvation: and Paul teaches that we are justified by faith apart from works of law. These two threads of teaching we find running side by side in conspicuous contrast throughout the writings of John and of Paul.

6. To harmonize these apparently different types of teaching, or rather to reach the one broad truth which underlies and unites them, is the difficult and pressing task of the theologian. The solemn and repeated teaching of the various New Testament writers proves indisputably that the earlier justification by faith does not in any way supersede the later justification by works, and that the present favour of God is possessed only by those who obey His commands. On the other hand, this final judgment according to works cannot invalidate the promise of life to all who believe. No harmony will satisfy us which does not give to each of these lines of teaching full and independent force.

The harmony is found in the contents of that word of God which is the object-matter of justifying faith, taken in connection with the mental and moral constitution of man. The Gospel is not a mere declaration concerning God, but a declaration of what God now does and will do to us who believe. It is a proclamation that God now receives into His favour and family and makes heirs of eternal life all who believe His proclamation. Consequently, our faith is an assurance resting upon the word and truth of God that through the death of Christ we have now the approbation of God, are His sons by adoption, and already possess a life which will develop into the endless joy of heaven. Now, to all who commit or love sin, this assurance is made impossible by the Voice which spoke in thunder at Sinai, a thunder re-echoed from the lips of Him who came to speak the Gospel of peace and re-echoed now in the hearts of all men with an authority they cannot gainsay, and which proclaims that on all who sin God frowns. All such are thus excluded from faith, and therefore from the number of the justified. The Law of God is an angel-sentinel with sword of flame guarding the way to Justification by Faith. It closes every path to the Tree of Life except that of repentance. Only they who resolve to forsake sin can believe that God now receives them into His favour: only they who actually conquer sin can believe that they have His abiding smile. Consequently, as a preliminary condition of justifying faith, repentance, i.e. the purpose to forsake sin, is also a condition of justification. It is therefore a part of the message of life: Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 20:21; 26:20. On the other hand, victory over sin is God’s gift, wrought by the Holy Spirit given to all who believe the Gospel promise.

The above harmony retains in this full sense both sides of the New Testament teaching about justification. All who believe the Gospel are justified in the moment of their faith: yet only they who obey God have His favour. Consequently, even in our sins, yet weary of and anxious to be saved from them, we dare to believe the proclamation of pardon for all who believe, assured that God will work in us by His Spirit the new life which He requires. Indeed not otherwise can we obey God: for obedience is a fruit of the Spirit, given to the adopted sons. Nor are we kept waiting till our faith has proved itself in works. At once, by faith, we are numbered among the justified; and in witness thereof we receive the Holy Spirit. He moves us to obey, and gives power to do so. They who yield to His influences find in their own inner life a confirmation of their faith. They who resist Him are presented, by their consciousness of this resistance, from believing that God smiles on them.

It is now clear that, although faith occupies a unique place as apart from works the one condition of justification, yet obedience is practically an essential condition also. In other words, the faith which justifies must show itself in works, or it will not (James 2:14) eventually save. Yet, as we have seen, justification was obtained at first not by works, even the good works which flow from faith, but simply by faith apart from and before works. The works which follow faith are results, not a condition, of justification. Similarly, our assurance of the continued favour of God rests, not upon our consciousness of having obeyed the commands of God, but simply and only upon the word of Christ proclaiming that all who believe shall have, and already have, eternal life. At the same time believers detect with gratitude a moral change in their inner and outer life. And this felt change they joyfully accept as confirmation of the faith they ventured to exercise before they felt in themselves any moral change whatever, and as an earnest of greater moral development yet to come. But this moral change is at best utterly insufficient to be a ground of assurance of God’s favour or hope of heaven. For God requires absolute obedience, which none can say that he has rendered. Christian confidence rests simply upon the word of God Himself. Thus, throughout the Christian’s life, justification is by faith apart from works; although without works there can be no abiding justification.

7. The moral Nature of God makes it impossible that He would have proclaimed justification for all who believe had He not resolved to work in all believers a moral change. For God cannot smile on those who live in sin. By this moral change, Justification by Faith is itself justified. God’s Holiness demands absolute devotion, involving absolute obedience, in all His intelligent creatures. Consequently, only so far as this devotion is yielded is there right relation between man and God. Yet without demanding such devotion as a previous condition, God accepts as righteous all who believe. He justifies this acceptance by giving to them the Holy Spirit who ever prompts the devotion God requires; and by writing in the hearts of all men moral principles which necessarily destroy faith in those who refuse to follow the guidance of the Spirit. Consequently, subsequent obedience is an essential element of Justification by Faith.

8. The faith which justifies can be no other than simple assurance that the words of Christ proclaiming life present and future for all believers are true and will come true. Such assurance is a resting upon the known character and love of God manifested in the death of Christ. See my Romans p. 145. Indeed all belief of a promise is self-surrender, in a measure determined by the greatness of the promise and of the interests at stake, to the ability and trustworthiness of the speaker. All else in the Christian life is wrought by the Spirit given to those who believe, and is therefore a result of foregoing justification; not a part of justifying faith. Consequently, the results of faith, e.g. hope and love, cannot be conditions of justification. They are its results.

9. Since all men are sinners, justification is practically pardon of the guilty. Consequently, the doctrine that believers are already justified is implied in many passages which speak of forgiveness of sins: e.g. Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3; Matthew 26:28; Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 5:31; 10:43; 26:18; Ephesians 1:7; Colossians 1:14; 2:13; 1 John 1:9; 2:12. For, that guilty ones are forgiven, implies that the judge has spoken in their favour. These passages confirm, therefore, the teaching of Paul and John that believers are already justified, and have eternal life.

10. In the foregoing exposition, we have found in the New Testament two interwoven threads of teaching about the means or condition of the favour of God; one presented most conspicuously in the First Gospel and the Epistle of James where we learn that God looks with favour only on those who obey His commands, and the other presented most conspicuously in the Epistles to the Galatians and the Romans where Paul teaches in plainest language that justification comes through faith apart from works of law. But we have also found that the teaching of Paul is only another form of teaching again and again attributed to Christ in the Fourth Gospel: and we have found points of contact with it in the other Gospels and in the Book of Acts. We have also found the teaching of the First Gospel repeated in unmistakable and very strong language in the Epistles of Paul and the First Epistle of John. These apparently contradictory types of teaching, we have endeavoured to harmonize by showing that the Law makes initial faith impossible except to those who sincerely desire to forsake sin, and abiding faith impossible except to those who actually overcome it; and by pointing to the Holy Spirit given to all who believe to work in them the obedience which God requires. Thus each type of teaching supplements the other, and guards it from perversion. Otherwise, the former type would bring only condemnation: and the latter would overturn morality.

11. Christian opinion about Justification has varied as men have laid chief weight upon one or other of these types of New Testament teaching. Of these varieties of opinion Luther’s Commentary on Galatians and the Decree on Justification of the Council of Trent (6th session) may be taken as extreme representatives.

With the teaching of Paul in the matter of Justification as expounded in this volume, Luther is, in the main, in complete and hearty accord. Again and again and in strongest language he asserts (see his note on Galatians 2:16) with Paul that “faith justifies without and before love.” That faith must and will be followed by good works he constantly teaches; but shuts out all good works as a ground of the favour of God. He says correctly, “when a man hears that he ought indeed to believe in Christ but that faith does not justify unless love is added, he at once loses faith.” So deeply did he feel that no secure ground of confidence can be found in anything we have done, but only in the work and death of Christ, that he excludes utterly from justification all thought of the Law or of obedience. In all this it seems to me that Luther is, both in thought and expression, in close accord with Paul. That for which Paul fought so earnestly at Jerusalem, at Antioch, and in this Epistle, was Luther’s great contention. And this doctrine, not a mere correction of abuses, evoked the marvellous outburst of spiritual life in Luther’s day: and bears abundant fruit now in all Protestant Churches.

But Luther goes on to say, on the ground of Galatians 2:16, that even if a man could keep the whole Law he would not thereby be justified; and declares that even with the grace of God none can perfectly obey God. So under Galatians 5:16: “because sin clings to you, while you live it is impossible that you fulfil the Law.” Of these assertions, the former is purely theoretical: for no one will claim the favour of God on the ground that he has kept the Law. The latter is, if not untrue, yet very inexpedient to say, and opposed to the tenor of Romans 8:4. Rather should we say that whatever God bids He will give power to do, or with Paul in Philippians 4:13, I can do all things in Him who makes me strong. Luther’s unproved assertion leaves us content with imperfect obedience: the bold works of Paul urge us to claim as God’s gift power to do whatever we know to be right. At the same time no one can by obedience obtain the favour of God: for all good works are results of His favour already obtained. And this important truth prompted, and is some apology for, the exaggerated assertion of Luther. This exaggeration, and others similar, are nevertheless flaws in the teaching of the Great Reformer; and have opened to his opponents points of attack, thus weakening the strength of his teaching about justification. But his teaching must be judged as a whole. And as a whole it is in very close accord with that of Paul. The teaching of the Roman Church is set forth at great length in the Decree on Justification of the Council of Trent, Sixth Session, 13th Jan. 1547. This Decree is the more worthy of attention because it was specially designed to combat the teaching of Luther and his followers. In ch. 7, the Fathers at Trent define Justification to be “not only remission of sins but also sanctification and renovation of the inner man through willing reception of grace and gifts; whence from unrighteous a man becomes righteous, from an enemy a friend, that he may be heir according to the hope of eternal life.” This differs from the definition of Justification accepted at the beginning of this Dissertation. But, since the Holy Spirit is given to those who believe in order to work in them conformity to the Law of God, the difference is only verbal.

A more serious difference follows. Deeply conscious that without doing right we cannot have the favour of God, and perhaps moved by immoral perversions of the teaching of Luther, the Council taught that “faith, unless hope be added to it and love, neither unites perfectly with Christ nor makes one a living member of His body. For which reason it is most truly said that faith without works is dead and inoperative, and in Christ Jesus neither circumcision avails anything nor uncircumcision but faith which works through love.” This view of Justification, which is put forth as a complete account of it and is not modified or supplemented by other teaching, seems to me to be not far removed from, and tending towards, the justification by works of law which in Galatians 3:10ff Paul proves to be impossible. For the Decree speaks, not of justification at the Great Day, but again and again of justification as a present, though very indefinite benefit. It is quite true that without hope and love there is no abiding and perfect union with Christ. But this union is obtained (Ephesians 3:17) by faith, never by hope and love. For though ever accompanying it, these are results, and therefore cannot be means, of union with Christ.

The practical effect of the above teaching is seen in ch. 9: “No one, boasting confidence and certainty of remission of sins and resting in that only, should say that his sins are or have been remitted.” Then follows a mixture of error and truth: “Nor should it be asserted that they who are truly justified ought without any doubt at all to determine with themselves that they are justified, and that no one is absolved from sins and justified except he who believes certainly that he is absolved and justified and that by this faith alone absolution and justification are effected.” In other words, while rightly condemning those who declare that none are justified except those who know it, the Council practically shuts out all assurance of justification, and condemns to doubt those who accept its teaching. Fortunately by many in the Church of Rome this teaching is supplemented and unconsciously modified by the plain words of Paul and John. But I cannot doubt that it has caused widespread and serious injury. In ch. 11, the Council rightly says: “No one to whatever degree justified ought to reckon himself to be free from observance of the commandments: no one ought to use that rash word forbidden under anathema by the Fathers, God’s precepts cannot possibly be observed by a justified man. For God does not command impossible things; but by commanding admonishes both to do what thou canst and to seek for what thou canst not do, and helps thee that thou mayest be able to do it. Whose commands are not heavy: whose yoke is easy and His burden light.” These good words reveal the error of Luther’s contrary assertions.

We need not hesitate to join the Council, ch. 16, in attributing to works done under the guidance of the Spirit a certain merit, in the sense of appropriateness for reward. But both the actions rewarded and whatever merit belongs to them are gifts of God’s undeserved favour in Christ. So the Decree well says: “Whose goodness toward all men is so great that what are His own gifts He calls their merits.”

12. Reviewing the whole subject we hold firmly that Justification is obtained simply by faith, before faith has attested itself by any good works or has produced even hope or love, that unless justification is followed by obedience the faith by which it is obtained and retained will die and our justification be lost, and yet that even while in some measure, and in an increasing measure, obeying the commands of God we rely for His favour not at all upon our obedience but simply on His word which promises, through the death of Christ, life to all who believe.

13. The doctrine of Justification, thus understood, has a bearing far wider than at first sight appears. Taught by the Spirit of God, the justified see more clearly day by day the path in which God would have them go, and the image of Christ which God would have reproduced in them. And this clearer vision reveals their own defect, and their powerlessness to supply it. Yet they know that only so far as God’s will is the rule of their life do they practically enjoy His favour. In their felt spiritual helplessness they cast themselves on the word and will of God: and with the faith by which as sinners they first obtained forgiveness they now claim and obtain a realisation, in proportion to their knowledge and faith, of God’s will concerning them. Thus does the faith which in their deep unrighteousness God mercifully reckoned to them for righteousness attain its consummation by working in them conformity to the Law of God: and this conformity is the mature development of the righteousness reckoned to them in the moment of their faith. This outworking of faith reveals its appropriateness as the one condition, even apart from works, of Justification. On the whole subject, a mass of information may be found in the Lectures of Justification by Cardinal Newman, written when an Anglican and annotated and republished after he joined the Church of Rome.

Dissertation 7. -- The Cross of Christ.

BEET_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 268

GALATIANS

DISSERTATION 7.

THE CROSS OF CHRIST.

1. The death of Christ upon the cross occupies in the teaching of Paul a position as conspicuous as, and closely connected with, that of the doctrine of Justification by Faith. This all-important teaching, in this connection, we will now consider. We shall thus supplement the note under Romans 3:26. Full discussion of it must, however, be postponed till we have before us the teaching of the remaining Epistles of Paul.

2. From Romans 5:9f we learn that our justification and reconciliation come through Christ’s blood and death, and that (Romans 5:6, 8) for this end Christ died: and on these repeated and emphatic statements rests an important argument. This strange and tremendous means, God adopted (Romans 3:26) in order to reconcile our justification with His own justice: a clear proof of its absolute necessity. This purpose explains, and is the only explanation of, the repeated statements that Christ died for us, and the importance everywhere attached to the death of Christ: cp. Romans 14:15; 1 Corinthians 8:11; 1:13, 18, 23; Romans 8:34. Since Christ’s death harmonized our justification with God’s justice, it was caused by our sins: so 1 Corinthians 15:3; Romans 4:25; Galatians 1:4; and especially Galatians 3:13, where Christ becomes Himself a curse in order to rescue us from the curse pronounced by the Law on all who break any one of its commands. For justice is the attribute of God specially offended by man’s sin. Since Christ saved us from the due penalty of our sins by Himself bearing it, He may be said to have died in our stead. And this is plainly implied in Galatians 3:13; 2 Corinthians 5:21. In this last passage the relation of Christ to our sins is said to be by an act of God. And the same is implied in Romans 3:25: for propitiation implies sin. Consequently, the death of Christ is our ransom: Galatians 3:13; 4:5; 1 Corinthians 6:20; 7:23. He is our slain passover, 1 Corinthians 5:7: for the Paschal lamb by its own death saved the firstborn from death. This explains the otherwise inexplicable teaching of 1 Corinthians 10:16; 11:25 that we are sharers in the blood of Christ, and that the New Covenant is ratified in His blood, passages which teach plainly that we receive benefit, even the benefits of the New Covenant, from Christ’s death.

That our life comes through Christ’s death, is the only explanation of the remarkable phrases crucified with Christ, crucified the flesh, the world crucified, in Galatians 2:20; 5:24; 6:14; and of the argument in Romans 6:4-8. For, if our deliverance from sin comes through the death by which Christ Himself escaped from the curse of our sin, then are we crucified with Christ: for we share the results of His crucifixion. The same is implied in 2 Corinthians 5:15 which teaches that Christ died in order that our old life may cease and that we may live a life altogether new. Similarly Romans 14:9, to this end Christ died… that both of dead and living He might become Lord. All this is confirmed by the teaching in Romans 7:4 that we died to the Law by the slain body of Christ in order that we may bear fruit for God; and by the teaching in Galatians 3:13f that Christ bore our curse that we might receive the Holy Spirit. The infinite importance of the death of Christ receives remarkable illustration in Galatians 6:14, where we read that, by the cross of Christ, Paul himself has died, and that therefore in that cross he glories and in nothing else.

The above teaching in these four Epistles is supported by abundant similar teaching in the other Epistles bearing the name of Paul; and by very conspicuous teaching in the Epistle to the Hebrews: e.g. Ephesians 2:13, 16; Philippians 3:18; Colossians 1:20, 22; 2:14, 20; 1 Timothy 2:6; 2 Timothy 2:12; Titus 2:14; Hebrews 2:9, 14; 7:27; 9:12-28; 10:12-14, 29; 13:12.

3. The passages quoted above prove indisputably that Paul believed so firmly that our life comes through Christ’s death, and attached to this doctrine so great importance, that it moulded his entire thought. Now even if his teaching on this subject stood alone, it would, as a very remarkable theological fact, demand explanation. We should ask whence it was derived. But it does not stand alone. Similar teaching is equally conspicuous in the Gospel and First Epistle of John: John 1:29; 3:14; 10:15, 17f; John 11:50ff; John 12:24; 15:13; 1 John 2:2; 3:16; 4:10. And it is the only explanation of the strange teaching in John 6:51-56 that in order to obtain eternal life we must eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of God. That our life comes through Christ’s death, is taught by Christ in each of the other Gospels: Matthew 20:28; 26:28; Mark 10:45; 14:24; Luke 22:20; 24:46f; and very clearly in 1 Peter 1:18f; 2:21-24; 3:18; 4:13; and in Revelation 1:5; 5:6, 9; 7:14. We notice, however, that, like Justification by Faith, the doctrine that our life comes through Christ’s death is absent from the Epistle of James.

Of this unanimity of nearly all the early disciples of Christ whose writings have come down to us, the only conceivable explanation is that the doctrine so confidently believed by the disciples was actually taught by their Master. For only thus can this unanimity be accounted for. To deny this, is, apart from all special authority of Holy Scripture, to trample under foot all the laws of historical research.

We are now face to face with the fact that Christ taught that His own death, not merely was an appropriate end of a life devoted to the interests of mankind, but is the channel through which comes the salvation He proclaimed; or, in other words, that the death of Christ holds a unique place even in His spotless life as being, in a sense shared by nothing else He did, the means of man’s salvation. As an indisputable historical fact, this result would remain even if we were utterly unable to explain the connection between our salvation and the death of Christ. To determine this connection, is, however, an all-important aim for further and reverent research.

4. An aid in our inquiry is found in Romans 3:26, where we learn that, apart from the propitiatory death of Christ, it would be inconsistent with the justice of God to justify men. Than these, no words could more strongly announce the absolute necessity of Christ’s death for our salvation. For God cannot be unjust. Now we can well understand that the justice of God would not permit justification of the guilty by mere prerogative. For, what God forbad in earthly judges (Deuteronomy 25:1; Isaiah 5:23) He could not Himself do. Indeed, it is a universal principle of human government that to permit the guilty to escape is to overturn all morality and the very foundations of society. And we may well suppose that this universal principle, like all such, has a root deeper than human society, that it rests upon the essential relations of intelligent creatures. If so, having its root in the Creator Himself, this principle will regulate His action. We may therefore conceive that God’s love to men forbad Him, as a king’s intelligent wish for the welfare of the people always forbids, to pardon sin by simple prerogative. For, such pardon would teach that the Law of God might be set aside. We may therefore believe that in order, without overturning His own Law which is an outflow of His goodness, to save those whom the Law condemned God sent His own Son so to unite Himself to us in human flesh that the penalty due to us should fall upon Him, who alone could endure that penalty without absolute destruction, in order that thus the Law might have its full course and the essential connection between sin and death be maintained, and yet the condemned race might, by contact with Incarnate Life, survive the infliction of the penalty and in spite of it attain eternal life. This solution, imperfect and tentative as it is, would account for all the Bible says about the death of Christ. For, if God sent His Son to save men from dying by Himself dying, then was Christ given by God to die in our stead; and, consequently, His blood is our ransom price. Since He saves us from the anger of God against sin, He is a propitiation for our sins. Since by His death Christ escaped from the curse of our sins and thus saved us from that curse, we are sharers with Christ in the results of His own death and may therefore be said to be crucified with Him. And, since by union with Him in His death we are delivered from bondage to our own flesh and to the world, that henceforth we may live a new life of which He is the one aim, to us the world and the flesh are crucified by His cross and our old life has been buried in His grace.

5. Notice carefully that the coming of Christ is ever traced to the love of God. Whatever the Son did, he did at the Father’s bidding. Consequently, His death reveals the Father’s infinite love to our race: Romans 5:8; 8:32; John 3:16; 10:18. To represent the Father as implacable, and the Son as pleading for those whom the Father was minded to slay, is to deny, by a hideous caricature, the unity of Father and Son and the Father’s infinite love to fallen man, and to contradict the teaching of the entire New Testament.

6. In Galatians 2:21 Paul says that if righteousness come by law, then has Christ died in vain, i.e. without motive and without result. This assertion, the above exposition explains and justifies. For righteousness by law is God’s approval obtained by obedience. If this were possible, the Law would need no vindication. For, justification of those who have kept the Law, is simply a carrying out of the principles of law. There would therefore be no need for the death of Christ. And we observe that they who teach that morality is the one and sufficient cure for human ailments have no need and no place in their teaching for the cross of Christ. In a sense still more serious Paul’s words are true. If the favour of God which comes through Christ’s death were conditional on man’s previous obedience, i.e. if righteousness came by law, we could never obtain it: for none can keep the Law as it claims to be kept, none can present a perfect morality. Consequently, if righteousness were by law, righteousness would be to us impossible. And the merciful purpose of the death of Christ would be thwarted. In spite of it all men would perish.

All this reveals the essential connection between Justification by Faith and Justification through the Death of Christ. To surrender the one, is practically to surrender the other. And each doctrine supports the other. The very blood of Christ proclaims that there is salvation even for those who find themselves unable to keep the Law. Justification by faith, which seems at first to violate the principles of law, needs to be itself justified by some tremendous vindication of the inviolability of the Law. This vindication is found in the death of Him who though sinless joined Himself to sinful flesh and blood. The costliness of the vindication proves the sacredness of the principles vindicated, of the eternal principles of morality embodied in the Law of God.

7. In the closely related matter of Justification, we have already seen that Christian opinion has varied greatly. Fortunately in reference to the death of Christ there has been, as apparently in the Churches of Galatia in Paul’s day, so in the Church of Christ throughout all ages and all countries, a practical unanimity. In the presence of this tremendous sacrifice even theological disputation has been hushed into silence and agreement. During long centuries the eyes of all His followers have been fixed upon His cross as the unique manifestation of the infinite love of God, and as the one channel through which that love has reached and saved them. From that Cross the most illustrious of the Servants of Christ have drawn the inspiration which made them great; and moved by the love there manifested thousands have died for Him who first died for them.

Dissertation 8. -- Summary of Results.

BEET_GAL.PDF, source PDF p. 273

GALATIANS

DISSERTATION 8.

SUMMARY OF RESULTS.

1. Our chief gains from the Epistle to the Galatians are theological and historical.

2. We have in this Epistle another independent view of the doctrine of Justification by Faith, in addition to that presented in the Epistle to the Romans. This second view, like a view of a great building from another standpoint, gives to our conception of the doctrine a sense of reality and of spiritual perspective not felt before. And this is increased by the entire difference of the points of view. In the Epistle to the Romans we found Justification by Faith the massive foundation-stone of a compact theological structure: and we viewed it in relation to the other parts of the same building. We here see it standing alone, a lofty monument in solitary grandeur: we look at it from all sides, and observe its unique position even amid the other doctrines of the Gospel. Moreover, we see it, not as in Romans calmly expounded in quiet theological thought, but in living combat with actual and deadly error. The intense earnestness of Paul’s argument and appeal reveals the immense practical importance of the doctrine, and the greatness of the issues therein involved. This earnestness reveals also the infinite importance of Christian doctrine in general, in wide contrast to the comparative indifference to doctrine boasted of now by many moral teachers. Such indifference was utterly alien to the heart of Paul. That which filled him with perplexity (Galatians 4:20) about his readers and with fear (Galatians 4:11; 2:2) lest his labours be in vain and Christ profit (Galatians 5:2) them nothing, was purely doctrinal error. In the main argument of the Epistle morality is not even mentioned. Paul’s anxiety about the Galatian Christians is indisputable and conspicuous proof of his firm belief that the spiritual and moral power of the Gospel rests on its doctrinal teaching.

The expositions of the Old Testament are not only welcome additions to those in the Epistle to the Romans but frequently cast upon these last individually additional light, thus enabling us better to understand Paul’s conception of the significance of the story of the Old Covenant. And the quotation and exposition, in each Epistle, of Genesis 15:6; Habakkuk 2:4; Leviticus 19:18 do great service by fixing attention on three passages which made so deep a mark in the mind of Paul and of other early Christian teachers. They will well repay, as will the other quotations in this Epistle, most careful study.

In many details the Epistle to the Galatians completes the theological teaching of the other three Epistles. We rise from it with a fuller and more accurate comprehension of the Gospel as Paul understood it, and of its fitness to supply our spiritual need.

3. Not less valuable are our historical gains.

This Epistle confirms the genuineness of those to the Romans and Corinthians. For, while its almost unmitigated censure is very unlike the work of a forger and the earnestness and sadness of the whole breathes intense reality, it is indisputably from the author of the other Epistles. Its marks of genuineness are therefore additional proofs that they are genuine. Important light is here cast on the early history of Paul. In this, as we have seen in Diss. i., the Epistle partly confirms and partly supplements the narrative of the Book of Acts.

Scarcely less valuable is the light cast on the position and character of Peter. We find him occupying, in close accord with the position given him by Christ in the Gospels, a unique position as the Apostle of the circumcision. And we see him betraying, under insignificant personal influence which yet he was unable to resist, the truth he had shortly before so loyally defended, in strange harmony with his denial of Christ for whom he had the same night been ready to fight and to die. This remarkable agreement confirms both the genuineness of this Epistle and the correctness of the delineations of Peter in the four Gospels. The position held in Galatians 2:9 by James as the first mentioned of the three pillars, and his welcome to Paul, agree closely with the notices of him, scanty though they are, in the Book of Acts, and with the Epistle attributed to him. We are glad to have a momentary sight of the Apostle John. And the references to Titus and Barnabas are welcome additions in close harmony with our other notices of them.

We thus gain from this Epistle a much fuller personal acquaintance with the most prominent men of the Apostolic Church: and this gives us a more definite and accurate conception of the founding of the Church. Still more important is the light cast by this Epistle on the most serious crisis through which the Church ever passed, viz. the transition of Christianity from being a form of Judaism to becoming a world-wide religion. We not only, as in Acts 15:1-29, witness the struggle but we feel its intensity vibrating in every line of this Epistle. This authentic picture of an early struggle on which hung the fate of Christianity and of the world has abiding and infinite value. For, this ancient conflict has its root in deep underlying principles of human nature. The relation of Judaism to Pauline Christianity, of works to faith, involves the great question, discussed in all ages, of the relation of morality and outward forms of religion to the inward and supernatural power promised and given by Christ. To determine this relation is one chief task of the theologian and the preacher. And in this task the Epistle before us renders invaluable aid.

The abiding conflict just referred to assumed special prominence at the Reformation. The teaching current in the Church of Rome then, and to some extent even now, I am compelled to believe, presents points of similarity, amid essential differences, to that of the Judaizers in Galatia. Indeed, of the various corruptions of Christianity, very many are returns towards Judaism. That the teaching for which Luther fought so strenuously was in the main the doctrine defended with equal earnestness in the Epistle before us by the Great Apostle of the Gentiles, is suggested by the Reformer’s great love for this Epistle, and seems to me proved by his exposition of it which still remains to us. Considering then its evident influence on the mind of Luther, it is not too much to say that to the Epistle we have in this volume studied we owe in no small degree the great outburst of spiritual life which marked the early part of the sixteenth century. From the silent pages of this letter sprang forth the spirit of Paul to plead once more for the truths he so faithfully defended in the infancy of the Church. And to that revival of the spirit of Paul is due, by the grace of God, the spiritual life of the Protestant nations of the present day. The immediate effect of this letter is quite unknown to us. Indeed we have only one later glimpse, for a moment, of the Apostolic Churches of Galatia. The mission ( 2 Timothy 4:10) of Crescens to Galatia may have been to the European home of the Gauls, not necessarily to their Asiatic settlement. But the mention of Galatia in 1 Peter 1:1 implies that, when Peter wrote, the Churches planted by Paul still existed and were looked upon as part of the Christian community.

Various casual notices by Eusebius, Jerome, and other later writers shed some light upon the Galatian Christians in the third and fourth centuries. And these references reveal dissensions as serious as, though quite different from, those which occasioned the letter before us. The permanence of the Churches in Galatia, and their discord, suggest perhaps that this letter was in its immediate purpose successful; but that the fickle disposition of the people remained unchanged, and that the children of those who in Paul’s day were so easily led astray by false teachers of Jewish nationality were in later days ready to accept any new heresy which arose. Thus the subsequent history of the Galatian Churches adds solemnity to the warnings of the Epistle we now reluctantly close. THE END.