Galatians

The first point to note about Galatians is that it is a letter, and it is worth pausing to consider what this means. A letter is a particular type of literature, written by one party, the author, to communicate with the other party, the recipient. A letter therefore serves a very specific and immediate purpose, concerning business which somehow connects the two parties to one another. There are of course any number of variety of letters, but any third party reading such a document needs to be aware that s/he is an outsider to the correspondence, and can therefore have only a limited understanding of the business transacted. There will always be information presupposed between the two parties which any other reader can only surmise or reconstruct incompletely.

In ancient letter-writing, the convention was for the author to identify him/herself at the beginning, as indeed Paul does in the first two words of Galatians: Paulos apostolos, Paul, an apostle. However, later in the convoluted opening sentence Paul adds and all the brothers who are with me. These brothers are not identified in any other way, but presumably refer either to the church in the place where Paul wrote or to his companions in mission at the time of writing. We may surmise where and when Paul wrote Galatians, but we cannot be absolutely certain on this point, as we will discuss shortly. However, we will also notice, when we look at the text of the letter, that Paul frequently uses the first person singular to refer to himself, and much of the first two chapters is concerned very directly with his status and authority. Whatever part the otherwise unidentified brothers may have played, Galatians is to all intents and purposes written by Paul, or at least with his playing a dominant role in its composition.

Identifying the second party, the recipients of Paul’s letter, is more complicated than may at first sight appear the case. The letter is addressed to the churches of the Galatians; the problem is that Galatians is a loosely defined geographical area in what is now Turkey. During the first century this entire region was under Roman rule, and divided into provinces which did not coincide precisely with the boundaries of the political entities over which Persians, Greeks, Armenians, and Romans had fought for several centuries. Unlike Paul’s other letters, which are addressed to the Christian communities of particular cities, Galatians is not addressed to a single church, but is a circular sent to group of churches over a wider geographical area.

In Acts 13-14 it is recounted that Barnabas and Paul established churches in the cities of Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe; while Antioch was in Pisidia and the other cities in Lycaonia, so far as Roman provincial boundaries at the time were concerned, but were nonetheless within a wider region commonly known as Galatia. The simplest solution to the question of destination would therefore be that the letter was written to a group of churches including Antioch, Inconium, Lystra, and Derbe, which had been founded by Barnabas and Paul during the 40’s of the first Christian century. Another theory, founded upon Acts 16:6, is that Paul, Silas, and Timothy undertook a mission in Phrygia and Galatia, which would presumably refer to parts of Galatia to the north of the cities mentioned in Acts 13-14, perhaps as far north as Ancyra. Acts provides no further details of this mission, and does not identify any cities in which Paul established churches. The mission is set later in the Acts account of Paul’s career, and identifies companions associated with Paul during the early 50’s of the first century, at the time when he was establishing churches in what is now Greece. There is no evidence of churches in such centres as Ancyra as early as the first century, nor any tradition that these were founded by Paul. This theory as to the destination of Galatians is therefore very much more difficult to substantiate than the first.

An important point in this discussion is that the letter was written by Paul to a specific group of Christian communities which he had been instrumental in founding, and with which he sought to assert a continuing relationship of oversight and discipline. As we cannot identify these churches with any certainty, there are limits to what we can know about the people who joined them, their background and culture, and the issues in society which impinged upon their faith and community life. We have access to a limited amount of knowledge, based on archaeological remains over the wider geographical area and on other writings of the period. We also have limited knowledge of the language and culture of the people of central Anatolia, and some insights into how they assimilated to the dominant Hellenistic culture of the Greeks and Romans. But, as we do not know the precise location of the churches addressed in the letter, we can apply this information only in very general terms to our reading of Galatians.

It is also of course important to recognise that we have no detailed account of the gospel as Paul proclaimed it to his audiences, whether he encountered them in the Jewish synagogues or elsewhere. Even if the accounts in Acts 13-14 are of the foundations of the churches addressed in this letter, the speeches attributed to Paul are very brief, and can be at most a reconstruction in digest form of what he actually said. We have no account at all of the teaching in the Christian faith which Paul delivered to those who responded to his initial missionary preaching, whether before or after he had baptised them. There is therefore a vast amount of very significant information shared between Paul and the Galatian Christians, presupposed in the letter, but not known to us. Paul does not need to repeat this information in any detail in order to be understood by the Galatian Christians. Contemporary readers, whether Christians receiving Galatians as Scripture or scholars studying the letter as an historical artefact, are not party to this information, but can at most make incomplete attempts to reconstruct it. We are therefore almost inevitably unaware of significant information crucial to understanding what Paul is saying. We therefore need to approach the text with some circumspection.

Dating the letter to the Galatians is in many respects contingent upon its destination. If Galatians was addressed to the churches of Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe, the area sometimes known for convenience as south Galatia, then it could have been written as early as c. AD 52, shortly after the most recent of the events recounted in Paul’s autobiographical narrative in the early chapters, to which we will turn shortly. The most likely place of writing would be Ephesus, or possibly Corinth. This would make Galatians one of the earliest of Paul’s letters, and one of the earliest writings of the entire New Testament. However, if Galatians was written to churches further north than these, and which had been founded at a later date, then the letter could not have been written before c. AD 55. While the difference of three or so years may mean very little from a perspective of nearly two thousand years later, it becomes crucial when we compare what Paul says in this letter and in that to the Romans about what seems to have been the most difficult theological, pastoral, and missionary question facing the early Church: the significance of Jewish laws and customs for Christians, both those of Jewish origin for whom these were their cultural heritage, and others for whom they were unfamiliar and alien.

Paul an apostle, not by human commission or from human authorities, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead— ²and all the brothers who are with me, to the churches of Galatia: 3 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, ⁴who gave himself for our sins to set us free from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, ⁵to whom be the glory for ever and ever. Amen.

apostle – one who is sent, an agent who carries out specific functions in the name of another, and with the authority of another; here Paul claims to be sent by God, and therefore to be acting on God’s authority, and in the name of Jesus Christ. Paul is clearly anxious to emphasise the divine source of his authority, as becomes clear in the following verses.

grace – the customary form of greeting in the Greek world.

peace – the customary Jewish greeting.

Paul offers these greetings in the name of God, and of Jesus Christ.

Jesus’ self-offering is his death on the cross, interpreted as a sacrifice. While there is clearly an implied comparison with the offering of animal sacrifices in temples, particularly that of Jerusalem, these varied in their significance, and Paul does not explain the metaphor further.

6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— ⁷not that there is another gospel, but there are some who are confusing you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. ⁸But even if we or an angel from heaven should proclaim to you a gospel contrary to what we proclaimed to you, let that one be accursed! ⁹As we have said before, so now I repeat, if anyone proclaims to you a gospel contrary to what you received, let that one be accursed!

It is clear that the Galatian Christians were no longer practising the faith as Paul had taught it. It becomes clear later in the letter that they had adopted some Jewish customs which Paul considers contrary to the gospel. It is equally clear that other significant figures in the early Church did not agree with Paul on this point. The polemical nature of Paul’s writing makes it extremely difficult to understand precisely what the issues were, but the strength of his conviction is quite apparent.

10 Am I now seeking human approval, or God’s approval? Or am I trying to please people? If I were still pleasing people, I would not be a servant of Christ.

Paul is anxious to emphasise that his authority derives from God, and he is accountable only to God.

11 For I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel that was proclaimed by me is not of human origin; ¹²for I did not receive it from a human source, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.

Paul is asserting that he was brought to faith in Christ not by the preaching of the first apostles, the disciples of Jesus, but by a direct divine revelation. The accounts of Paul’s conversion in Acts 9; 22; & 26 are relevant here.

13 You have heard, no doubt, of my earlier life in Judaism. I was violently persecuting the church of God and was trying to destroy it. ¹⁴I advanced in Judaism beyond many among my people of the same age, for I was far more zealous for the traditions of my ancestors.

Here and elsewhere (2 Cor 11:22-23; Phil 3:4-6) Paul emphasises that he was a devout, learned, and observant Jew; elsewhere he identifies himself as a Pharisee. It was as a direct consequence of his devotion to Judaism that he had persecuted the Church.

¹⁵But when God, who had set me apart before I was born and called me through his grace, was pleased ¹⁶to reveal his Son to me, so that I might proclaim him among the Gentiles, I did not confer with flesh and blood,

In the Old Testament, as with John the Baptist and Jesus in the Gospels, the birth of a person of future significance is often described as having been foreordained by God. Here Paul alludes to Jer 1:5, where the prophet is told that his calling was determined before his birth, even though he had been unaware of it and was inclined to resist God’s call.

Paul alludes to his conversion experience, described by Luke in Acts 9; 22; & 26. God’s purpose in revealing Jesus to Paul is that he would proclaim the Gospel to gentiles – people who were not part of Israel and did not practise Judaism.

flesh and blood – any human being.

¹⁷nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were already apostles before me, but I went away at once into Arabia, and afterwards I returned to Damascus.

Paul is anxious to emphasise that the original apostles, the disciples of Jesus, had no part in his conversion, or in interpreting the gospel to him. Paul does not explain what he did in Arabia, or where precisely he went. It is likely that he took some time to reflect upon his experience and come to understand its significance for him.

18 Then after three years I did go up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and stayed with him for fifteen days; ¹⁹but I did not see any other apostle except James the Lord’s brother. ²⁰In what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie!

The account in Acts 9:26-30 suggests that the leaders of the Jerusalem church were reluctant to receive Paul. This may be reflected in Paul’s having met only Peter and James, the brother of Jesus. Peter is referred to by the Aramaic version of the name given him by Jesus, emphasising his Jewishness.

²¹Then I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia,

Syria and Cilicia were the Roman provinces to the north of Judaea. Paul’s home was Tarsus in Cilicia, and Acts recounts that Barnabas sought him from there to join in the work of the church in Antioch, the capital of Syria.

²²and I was still unknown by sight to the churches of Judaea that are in Christ; ²³they only heard it said, ‘The one who formerly was persecuting us is now proclaiming the faith he once tried to destroy.’ ²⁴And they glorified God because of me.

The importance of Paul’s being known only by reputation to the Christians of Judaea is that they could not have had any part in his conversion or authorisation as an apostle of Christ.

2Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. ²I went up in response to a revelation. Then I laid before them (though only in a private meeting with the acknowledged leaders) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure that I was not running, or had not run, in vain.

In Acts 15:1-2 Barnabas and Paul are sent to Jerusalem by the leaders of the church in Antioch. Paul gives himself a very much more dominant role, and does not even mention to church of Antioch. The Acts account also suggests a very much more formal, if not necessarily public, meeting. It is clear that, however reluctant Paul may be to admit this, the leaders of the Jerusalem church exercised some authority which impinged on his standing in the wider Church.

³But even Titus, who was with me, was not compelled to be circumcised, though he was a Greek.

Circumcision was one of the principal symbols of Jewish identity. Paul’s point is that Titus was not compelled to become a Jew in order to be acknowledged as a Christian in Jerusalem, the centre of the Jewish world, and of the Church during this period.

⁴But because of false believers secretly brought in, who slipped in to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might enslave us— ⁵we did not submit to them even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might always remain with you.

Paul denounces those who hold a different theological and missionary position to his own. We do not have their account of what they believed and practised. It is likely that they believed that Christian life involved living as a Jew and identifying with Israel, and that they at the least encouraged male gentile converts to be circumcised.

⁶And from those who were supposed to be acknowledged leaders (what they actually were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality)—those leaders added nothing to me.

There is an element of sarcasm in Paul’s reference to the Jerusalem apostles, whose authority in the Church he is very reluctant to concede.

⁷On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel of uncircumcision, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel of circumcision, ⁸for he who worked through Peter in the apostolate to the circumcised also worked through me to the Gentiles, ⁹and when James and Cephas and John, who were the acknowledged pillars, recognized the grace that had been given to me, they gave to Barnabas and me the right hand of fellowship, agreeing that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.

Paul portrays two parallel Christian missions, one headed by Peter and the other by himself. How these were differentiated is not clear, as division along ethnic or geographical lines makes no sense of what we know of early Christian history. Rather, there seems to have been a recognition that two different interpretations of the Gospel had emerged, one of which saw the Church as existing within Israel with Christians observing the Jewish law, and one which saw the Church as outside Israel, drawing Jews and gentiles into a new entity defined by allegiance to Christ.

¹⁰They asked only one thing, that we remember the poor, which I was indeed eager to do.

The ethical requirement to do good to the poor is incumbent on all Christians. While commonly understood to mean that Paul was required to raise financial support for the Jerusalem church, the text does not say or imply this.

11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood self-condemned; ¹²for until certain people came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But after they came, he drew back and kept himself separate for fear of the circumcision faction.¹³And the other Jews joined him in this hypocrisy, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. ¹⁴But when I saw that they were not acting consistently with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, ‘If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?’

This episode illustrates the complexities of Christian life in a Greek city, in which Jewish and gentile Christians formed a single church. It seems clear that Christians from Jerusalem, who perhaps had little previous contact with gentiles, were uncomfortable with the common life of the church in Antioch, despite Peter’s having conformed with this. Barnabas supported Peter in accommodating the visitors’ sensibilities, which does not necessarily imply that a permanent change in the pattern of common life in the church was envisaged. Paul nevertheless objected strongly, but the outcome of his confrontation is not recorded – which suggests that the church supported Peter and Barnabas.

15 We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; ¹⁶yet we know that a person is justified not by the works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ. And we have come to believe in Christ Jesus, so that we might be justified by faith in Christ, and not by doing the works of the law, because no one will be justified by the works of the law.¹⁷But if, in our effort to be justified in Christ, we ourselves have been found to be sinners, is Christ then a servant of sin? Certainly not! ¹⁸But if I build up again the very things that I once tore down, then I demonstrate that I am a transgressor. ¹⁹For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ;²⁰and it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. ²¹I do not nullify the grace of God; for if justification comes through the law, then Christ died for nothing.

The transition from Paul’s account of the incident in Antioch and his theological defence of his position in this letter is seamless, and we cannot ascertain precisely where one ends and the other begins.

An interesting and crucial issue with these verses concerns the translation of the phrase here rendered “faith in (Jesus) Christ”. The Greek could also be translated “faithfulness of (Jesus) Christ”, i.e. Jesus’ faith in God, his undergoing death on the cross, so allowing salvation to be made available to humanity. Paul’s point in this passage is that Jesus’ death and resurrection are the defining moment of human salvation. Human behaviour, including observance of the Jew law, cannot achieve salvation, and should not be undertaken as though it could.

3You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you?

This is not simply hyberbole or rhetorical exaggeration. Magic in various forms was widely practised in the Graeco-Roman world, and witchcraft allegations must be understood in this context. Paul is suggesting that sinister supernatural powers had been engaged to undermine the commitment of the Galatian Christians to the Gospel as he had preached it, and to influence them to adopt a more Torah observant version of the Gospel.

It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly exhibited as crucified!

The proclamation of the Gospel is compared with a graphic depiction of the crucified Jesus. The cross is a very important motif in this section of Galatians, and we need to recognise that the instrument of crucifixion had not yet become a symbol of the faith. In a sense it is Paul’s writing which transforms the cross into a powerful symbol of Christianity.

²The only thing I want to learn from you is this: Did you receive the Spirit by doing the works of the law or by believing what you heard?

However reception of the Holy Spirit may have been perceived or experienced, Paul assumes that the Galatian Christians are conscious of having received this gift. The question is whether it was observance of the Jewish law or their response of faith to the proclamation of the Gospel which brought this about.

³Are you so foolish? Having started with the Spirit, are you now ending with the flesh? ⁴Did you experience so much for nothing?—if it really was for nothing. ⁵Well then, does God supply you with the Spirit and work miracles among you by your doing the works of the law, or by your believing what you heard?

Paul sees the Galatians’ adoption of the Jewish law as a decline from their early Christian lives which had been governed by the spirit of God inhabiting them, and enabling works of clearly extraordinary power to take place in their communities. Paul’s opponents, on the other hand, are likely to have seen adoption of the law as a sign of Christian maturity, and a means to stabilise the faith that had been adopted with some emotional zeal, and to ensure that the gentile Christians of Gaaltia would persevere in their faith in an hostile environment.

6 Just as Abraham ‘believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness’, ⁷ so, you see, those who believe are the descendants of Abraham.

In the Genesis narrative, Abraham receives God’s call, abandons his ancestral ways, accepts God’s promise, and migrates to the land his heirs would inherit. Jewish tradition of the first century identified Abraham as the archetypal proselyte, one who had repudiated the worship of idols and turned to the one true God. The Jewish people claimed physical descent from Abraham, and thereby the heritage of the covenant entered between God and Abraham. This included possession of the land of Israel (in theory) and the Law of Moses. It is Abraham’s status as a proselyte with which Paul is concerned in the first instance. He identifies Abraham’s response to God as one of faith (citing Gen 15:6). This faith becomes the basis of Abraham’s righteousness before God, and this precedes his circumcision by many years. Circumcision is therefore not essential to Abraham’s justification.

⁸And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the nations by faith, declared the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, ‘All the Gentiles shall be blessed in you.’ ⁹For this reason, those who believe are blessed with Abraham who believed.

Paul quotes Gen 12:3, the very beginning of the Abraham narrative in Genesis. It is worth noting that most English translations would use the term “nations” rather than “gentiles”. In Jewish parlance, the Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek word for “nations” would of course apply specifically to all other nations, i.e. to non-Jews. This usage has tended to be adopted unconsciously and uncritically in Christian usage, but does not imply that the various nations known to Israel during the Old Testament period, or to Jews of the time of Paul, had any sense of collective identity as being “non-Jewish”.

10 For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse; for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who does not observe and obey all the things written in the book of the law.’

It is a major point in Paul’s argument in Galatians that the law cannot be observed selectively or piecemeal: either it is to be observed in full, or not at all. Here Paul cites Deut 27:26, a text from the law itself.

¹¹Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law; for ‘The one who is righteous will live by faith.’

Here Paul quotes Hab 2:4. The principle would have been shared by other Jewish teachers of Paul’s day. Nobody taught that observance of the law could merit justification, without the faith in God that is the basis of the law. The first of the “ten commandments” in Exod 20:2-3 concerns God’s exclusive claim to the allegiance of Israel.

¹²But the law does not rest on faith; on the contrary, ‘Whoever does them will live by them.’

Paul cites Lev 18:5. Pace NRSV, the word for “law” is not in the quotation, but the reference is clear in the passage in Leviticus. Paul seems to be pre-empting or contradicting an argument that observance of the law is a corollary of faith, precisely because the law followed God’s call to Abraham.

¹³Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree’—

This is one of the most contentious verses in Galatians. Paul refers to the law as a curse, which observant Jews considered a joy and a privilege. Only those who found observance of the law an impediment to their assimilating into Graeco-Roman society would have considered it a curse. Paul quotes Deut 21:22-23, which prescribes that, if the body of an executed criminal is exposed by hanging from a tree, it should be taken down before nightfall, as it would defile the land to hang the body for any longer. The textual tradition has mutated as these verses have been applied to different penal codes over the centuries, but it is certain that the text did not refer originally to death by crucifixion. By applying this text to Jesus’ death Paul asserts that, as Jesus’ body became a curse according to the law, so Jesus freed Christians from that law.

¹⁴in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the nations, so that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

15 Brothers, I give a human example: once a person’s will has been ratified, no one adds to it or annuls it.

Some modern translations refer to sisters as well as brothers. While the masculine noun can be used inclusively in Greek, and Paul undoubtedly intends so to be understood, the word for sisters does not actually appear in the text.

In using an analogy from the laws governing succession and inheritance in the Graeco-Roman world, Paul appeals to the image of the household – the fundamental social unit in the ancient world. The family or household included not only the biological family of the patron, but also an extended network of “clients”, servants, slaves, and former slaves (freedmen). Succession to the ownership of the household was in principle hereditary, with the assets and responsibilities passing normally from father to son. The system favoured the male, freeborn, biological heir. The will stipulated the transition in ownership from one generation to the next, and its terms could not be changed once the will was in force.

¹⁶Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring; it does not say, ‘And to offsprings’, as of many; but it says, ‘And to your offspring’, that is, to one person, who is Christ.

Here Paul directly challenges the claim of Israel to be the heirs of Abraham, and of the promises made to him. In citing Gen 12:7, he claims that God promises the inheritance to a single heir of Abraham, not to all his descendents. He identifies that heir as Jesus Christ, the crux of his theology so far as the relationship between the Church and Israel is concerned, and so far as the status and obligations of gentile Christians in the Church is concerned.

¹⁷My point is this: the law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the promise.

Paul uses the Pentateuchal narrative to argue that, as the law was not part of God’s initial covenant with Abraham, it could not become a subsequent obligation of that covenant. This of course denies the entire thrust of the biblical narrative and of Israel’s self-understanding, as well as of the theological position against which Paul is arguing, viz. that gentiles who converted to Christianity needed to undertake all the obligations of membership of Israel if they were to share fully in the life of the Church.

¹⁸For if the inheritance comes from the law, it no longer comes from the promise; but God granted it to Abraham through the promise.

Paul contrasts the promises made to Abraham with the law mediated through Moses several centuries later.

19 Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the offspring would come to whom the promise had been made; and it was ordained through angels by a mediator.

Paul’s argument requires some explanation as to the purpose of the law. He suggests that the law was introduced for the period until the coming of the heir. It would govern the lives of intermediate generations, to compensate for the shortcomings of those descendents of Abraham who would not be heirs to the promise.

In suggesting that the law was mediated through angels, Paul implies that God did not speak directly to Moses. In Paul’s argument this serves to diminish the significance of Moses and of the law. However, in contemporary Jewish thought, angelic mediators were introduced to the tradition on account of a heightened sense of God’s transcendence, and their presence in retellings of the biblical narratives in no way implied diminishing the importance or the holiness of the human characters.

In explaining the purpose of the law, Paul once again refers to the contemporary laws and customs of succession. Civil law made provision for guardians to manage the estate during the minority of the heir, and wills would include such terms to ensure that the household was governed, and its assets protected, until the heir came of age. In the ancient world, life expectancy was much lower than today, and parents frequently did not live to see their children attain adulthood. Such provisions were therefore very important. The guardian, who could be a person of relatively low status such as a slave in the household, would wield considerable authority in the household and over the heir himself.

²⁰Now a mediator involves more than one party; but God is one.

21 Is the law then opposed to the promises of God? Certainly not!

Paul confronts what many contemporaries would have seen as the corollary of his argument, that the law is in fact in conflict with God’s intentions. The force of this argument was such that some followers of Paul, such as Marcion (mid-2^nd century) subsequently developed this point further, arguing that God, the father of Jesus Christ, was not the creator of the world and did not give the law to Israel. They rejected the entire Old Testament, and also those parts of the New Testament which they considered too Jewish. We can therefore appreciate that this was a very dangerous argument, from which Paul draws away when it is already too late.

For if a law had been given that could make alive, then righteousness would indeed come through the law.

This is a point which would have been agreed by Paul’s contemporaries, Christian and Jewish alike.

²²But the scripture has imprisoned all things under the power of sin, so that what was promised through faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. 23 Now before faith came, we were imprisoned and guarded under the law until faith would be revealed.

Sin is here understood as a spiritual force, which has the potential to influence and control people, rather than as a category of forbidden acts.

Paul is in a sense beginning his argument from the Christian gospel, and working backwards to understand the purpose of the Old Testament and the law it contains. The argument is of course circular, as the Gospel cannot be understood apart from the Old Testament which preceded it. The cardinal point is that, however the law may have been lived and interpreted, it is subordinate and preliminary to the fulfilment of God’s purposes in Jesus Christ.

²⁴Therefore the law was our disciplinarian until Christ came, so that we might be justified by faith.²⁵But now that faith has come, we are no longer subject to a disciplinarian,

The word rendered “disciplinarian” is paidagogos. Despite being the word from which much of the technical language to do with education and teaching is derived, the paidagogos was not a teacher, but a slave who escorted boys to school or assisted the teacher who instructed them in the home, and administered discipline. Like the guardian in the case of the minor heir, the disciplinarian exercises a temporary authority, which ends when the child comes of age.

²⁶forthrough faith in Christ Jesus you are all children of God.

This verse is central to Paul’s theology in Galatians. Becoming the children of God means becoming heirs in the household of God. In the Graeco-Roman world, Adoption was a well-known means of choosing an heir, particularly but not only in a childless family. A legal process was followed which dissolved the legal connection of the designated heir with his/her family of birth, a created a fictive but nonetheless legally recognised, kinship relationship in the family of adoption.

²⁷As much as you have been baptized into Christ you have clothed yourselves with Christ.

Most translations use the expression “as many of you”, but Paul is concerned not with the number of the baptised, but with the consequences of baptism. Baptism is the rite of initiation, or adoption. The details of the water rite are not provided, but if clothing follows, this suggests that stripping precedes the ritual washing. This may suggest that immersion or submersion in water was normative, but does not stipulate that this is necessary.

Clothing in the ancient world is not a matter of personal style or taste, but reflects social status, function, and is gender-specific.

²⁸There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.

The identity acquired in baptism supersedes the race, social rank, and gender which precede. In a world in which race and status were inherited, and seldom if ever changed, Christian baptism represents a quite fundamental transformation. The distinction between Jew and Greek reflects how Jews in the Graeco-Roman cities viewed humanity, essentially as themselves and others. Such a taxonomy is not untypical of human societies, and, while Paul’s concern is that Christians of Jewish and other backgrounds are equally members of Christ, the principle of course applies wherever Christians may be divided by nationality, ethnicity, or culture. While at first sight it may seem a lesser concern in Galatians, the same principle applies to distinctions of social status; that between slave and free was the most obvious, and the most stark, in the ancient world, and modern forms of slavery and other oppressive means of discrimination against the less powerful in society are equally condemned, and have no place in the life of the Church. That the distinction between male and female is abolished in Christ is perhaps the one which the Church has found most difficult to realise in its own life and in the cultures which Christian values have influenced. Nevertheless it is equally clear, men and women are equally members of Christ.

²⁹And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to the promise.

The argument is brought to a conclusion, with several strands drawn together. Membership of Christ, attained through baptism, confers status as a descendant of Abraham. Baptism is effectively a rite of adoption. Having identified Jesus Christ as the sole heir of Abraham, Paul extends the inheritance of Abraham to all who are members of Christ.

4My point is this: heirs, as long as they are minors, are no better than slaves, though they are the owners of all the property; ²but they remain under guardians and trustees until the date set by the father. ³So with us; while we were minors, we were enslaved to the elemental spirits of the world.

Paul reiterates the point made previously, in which he draws upon contemporary laws of succession and inheritance to explain the temporary role and authority of the Jewish law in the world. Its function is analogous to the control exercised over an estate during the minority of the heir, who cannot assume the powers of ownership until coming of age.

The law is identified as an elemental spirit. This reflects ancient cosmology, which discerned spirits present in all objects in the universe, whether visible or invisible. Those Christians who had not been subject to the Jewish law would have had their lives controlled, or at least influenced, by any number of other elemental spirits.

⁴But when the fullness of time had come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, ⁵in order to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons.

The moment chosen by God for intervention in the world through the birth of Jesus is compared with the moment when the heir attains majority and is freed from the authority of guardians over his person and the property he is to inherit. Jesus as God’s son is the rightful heir, but his role is to extend the benefits of his inheritance to others. Paul emphasises Jesus’ human birth, and also his identity as a Jew; only Jews were born under the law mediated through Moses at Sinai. Nevertheless, the analogy of adoption emphasises that the inheritance was to be shared by people not born to it. Those needing redemption are slaves (or captives), who are not merely freed from servitude or bondage but elevated to the status of children, and therefore of (potential) heirs – which is a transformation in status far beyond what freed slaves in the ancient world could expect.

⁶And because you are children, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, ‘Abba! Father!’ ⁷So you are no longer a slave but a child, and if a child then also an heir, through God.

The gift of the Spirit reflects the early Christian experience of Baptism which Paul has just interpreted as a rite of adoption. Reception of the Spirit enables Christians to recognise God as father. Paul uses the Aramaic word for father, which suggests that some Aramaic prayers or expressions were conveyed unaltered from the Jewish to the gentile world, and used by Greek-speaking Christians. Another example is “Maran atha” in 1 cor 16:22. It is possible that Aramaic phrases were accorded some mystical quality, and believed to be especially powerful in addressing God.

8 Formerly, when you did not know God, you were enslaved to beings that by nature are not gods.

Paul refers unambiguously to the pagan past of the gentile Christians of Galatia. Their worship of Greek and Roman deities brought them into bondage, despite these not being true gods. It is not always clear whether Paul understood the pagan deities to be evil spirits, or simply non-existent. His treatment of the issue of eating meat offered in pagan sacrifices in 1 Cor 8; 10 is ambiguous on this point.

⁹Now, however, that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and needy elemental spirits? How can you want to be enslaved to them again?

Paul is implying that for gentile Christians to take upon themselves observance of the Jewish law would be little different to reversion to paganism. While Paul clearly intends to be disparaging towards Judaism, the point here is that the Jewish law is a spiritual force to which they have no need to be subject, as the adopted children of God and heirs to God’s promises.

¹⁰You are observing special days, and months, and seasons, and years. ¹¹I am afraid that my work for you may have been wasted.

In Judaism the Sabbath was, and still is, a significant observance. New moons, the new year, and other seasonal celebrations were also a part of the Jewish calendar. These observances are prescribed in the Pentateuch, and therefore form part of the Jewish law which Paul is anxious the Galatian Christians should not begin to observe.

12 Friends, I beg you, become as I am, for I also have become as you are. You have done me no wrong.

Paul has in effect abandoned his way of life as an observant Jew, in order that he could live among his gentile converts and lead them in defining a way of life which consolidates their Christian faith, and separates them from paganism without making them live as though they were Jews.

¹³You know that it was because of a physical infirmity that I first announced the gospel to you; ¹⁴though my condition put you to the test, you did not scorn or despise me, but welcomed me as an angel of God, as Christ Jesus.

We have no other information about the illness Paul suffered, or how this brought him to proclaim the gospel in Galatia rather than elsewhere. The narrative in Acts gives no indication at all, and Paul provides no further details. In 2 Cor 12:7 Paul refers to a “thorn in the flesh”, which is clearly a physical condition but is otherwise unidentified. It would seem that the symptoms were ones which would provoke revulsion, embarrassment, or contempt, but identifying these is very difficult given that such reactions are largely determined by the cultural context of which we know very little.

¹⁵What has become of the goodwill you felt? For I testify that, had it been possible, you would have torn out your eyes and given them to me.

Paul clearly discerns a significant change in the attitude of the Galatian Christians to him. They had clearly come under the influence of other authority figures, who understood aspects of the Gospel quite differently.

¹⁶Have I now become your enemy by telling you the truth? ¹⁷They make much of you, but for no good purpose; they want to exclude you, so that you may make much of them.

Without knowing quite what had been said to the Galatian Christians, and what had persuaded them to adopt Jewish observances, it is difficult to understand the thrust of Paul’s argument. It is quite clear that Paul regards such a change in their behaviour as seriously defective, but it must have been attractive to the Galatians. It may have been suggested to them that a more demanding pattern of Christian life would make them more fully a part of the Church, and that in excusing them observance of the Jewish law Paul had relegated them to some inferior and defective category of Christian: their full incorporation in the Church required that they become members of Israel. Paul’s rejoinder is that their actions have the opposite of the desired effect.

¹⁸It is good to be made much of for a good purpose at all times, and not only when I am present with you. ¹⁹My little children, for whom I am again in the pain of childbirth until Christ is formed in you, ²⁰I wish I were present with you now and could change my tone, for I am perplexed about you.

The maternal image is one which Paul uses quite frequently to describe his relationship with the communities he had founded, cf. 1 Thess 2:7.

21 Tell me, you who desire to be subject to the law, will you not listen to the law? ²²For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by a slave woman and the other by a free woman. ²³One, the child of the slave, was born according to the flesh; the other, the child of the free woman, was born through the promise. ²⁴Now this is an allegory: these women are two covenants. One woman, in fact, is Hagar, from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery. ²⁵Now Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is in slavery with her children. ²⁶But the other woman corresponds to the Jerusalem above; she is free, and she is our mother.

In the Genesis narrative, Hagar is the slave, and her son Ishmael is the son born to servitude. It is Sarah who is Abraham’s wife and the mother of his son and heir, Isaac. Paul associates Hagar and Ishmael with Mount Sinai, the place where Moses received the law, and with Jerusalem, the centre of Jewish national identity and the location of the temple. Sarah and Isaac are associated with the heavenly Jerusalem, and it is with them that Christians are associated in this passage. As Jews claimed descent from Isaac, and to be the heirs to God’s promises to Abraham, this passage is deeply problematic.

²⁷For it is written,

‘Rejoice, you childless one, you who bear no children,

burst into song and shout, you who endure no birth pangs;

for the children of the desolate woman are more numerous

than the children of the one who is married.’

Paul quotes Isa 54:1. The motif of barren women finally giving birth to children, as a result of God’s particular blessing, recurs frequently in the Biblical narrative, from Sarah, Rebekkah, Leah and Rachael, to Hannah and Elizabeth. The children born in these circumstances are frequently called to distinctive roles in realising God’s purposes.

²⁸Now you, my brothers, are children of the promise, like Isaac. ²⁹But just as at that time the child who was born according to the flesh persecuted the child who was born according to the Spirit, so it is now also. ³⁰But what does the scripture say? ‘Drive out the slave and her child; for the child of the slave will not share the inheritance with the child of the free woman.’ ³¹So then, brothers, we are children, not of the slave but of the free woman.

Paul refers to the story in Genesis 21, in which Sarah is angered by Ishmael, described as playing with or laughing at the infant Isaac, and demands that Abraham dismiss Hagar and send her and Ishmael away. Abraham is reluctant, but is reassured by God that this would be in accordance with God’s plans. Nevertheless, this is a story which conflicts with Jewish ethics, and Paul’s contemporaries struggled to interpret it. In suggesting that Jews are the heirs of Ishmael, Paul is manipulating the Biblical text and the tradition in ways which we would not consider legitimate. In effect he is saying that Judaism represents an illegitimate development out of God’s covenant with Abraham, and that the Church, through Jesus, is the true heir. In adopting Jewish observances, the Galatian Christians are in effect removing themselves from their rightful position in the true covenant, that of freedom, and reducing themselves to the slavery with which Paul associates Judaism.

5 For freedom Christ has set us free. Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. 2 Listen! I, Paul, am telling you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you.

So far as Paul is concerned, if the Galatian Christians undergo circumcision and adopt other Jewish customs, they will be reverting to the state they were in before conversion to Christianity. The benefits of their baptism into Christ will be nullified. There may be an element of rhetorical exaggeration on Paul’s part, but his vehemence is nonetheless not to be overlooked.

³Once again I testify to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obliged to obey the entire law.

The law is a “package deal”, and cannot be observed selectively. Circumcision may be a “one-off” event, but it implies a lifelong commitment to observe the law in full. As well as being in many respects alien to Christians of another cultural background, there could have been practical difficulties in observing the dietary laws, and in offering sacrifices which were permitted only in the temple in Jerusalem. Not all gentile Christians would have been at liberty to observe the sabbath.

⁴You who want to be justified by the law have cut yourselves off from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.

Paul stresses a dichotomy between two ways of life, that of observing the Jewish law and that of following Christ. There may well be rhetorical exaggeration in Paul’s choice of expression, but his rejection of the way of life in which he had been nurtured is nonetheless clear.

⁵For through the Spirit, by faith, we eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness. ⁶For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything; the only thing that counts is faith working through love.

In suggesting that being circumcised or otherwise is a matter indifferent, Paul might appear to be contradicting what he has said previously. We should probably understand Paul to be referring here to whether Christians were of the circumcision, i.e. Judaism, or uncircumcision, i.e. gentiles, before their conversion. Whatever their background, what matters is that they have been filled with God’s spirit, and that they are fully committed, i.e. faithful, to the Gospel whose definitive ethic is love.

7 You were running well; who prevented you from obeying the truth? ⁸Such persuasion does not come from the one who calls you. ⁹A little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough.

This is not the first time that Paul suggests that the Galatian Christians have been misled by some conflicting influence, in the form of Christian leaders who taught that conversion to the Gospel of Christ involved observing the Jewish law. The image of the yeast would have been clear in suggesting that the magnitude of the influence is disproportionate to the substance, in other words, a few people could easily wield considerable influence over large numbers of people.

¹⁰I am confident about you in the Lord that you will not think otherwise. But whoever it is that is confusing you will pay the penalty.

Paul expects that his argument will persuade the Galatian Christians to revert to the pattern of Christian observance he had taught. The pronouncement of judgement against those who had influenced them in another direction serves to reinforce Paul’s argument.

¹¹But my friends, why am I still being persecuted if I am still preaching circumcision?

This question could suggest that those who had influenced the Galatian Christians to depart from Paul’s teaching had claimed that they were completing the work that Paul had begun: Paul had always envisaged that gentile Christians would eventually adopt Jewish observances as the completion of their conversion. In urging the Galatians to observe the Jewish law, they were bringing to its conclusion the work that Paul had begun. This might have been a plausible and persuasive argument when addressed to gentile Christians during the earliest years of Christianity. Paul’s rejoinder is to remind the Galatian Christians that he has been, and still is, subject to persecution for preaching against the imposition of Jewish observances on gentile Christians.

In that case the offence of the cross has been removed.

Paul reinforces the point made earlier that crucifixion, as a particularly degrading form of judicial execution, was an obstacle to acknowledgement of Jesus as messiah. But if observance of the law would enable Jews and gentiles to attain righteousness, the death of Jesus and his status as messiah would be irrelevant.

¹²I wish those who unsettle you would castrate themselves!

Given the nature of circumcision as a surgical procedure, the irony in this statement is clear.

13 For you were called to freedom, brothers; only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for self-indulgence, but through love become slaves to one another. ¹⁴For the whole law is summed up in a single commandment, ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself.’ ¹⁵If, however, you bite and devour one another, take care that you are not consumed by one another.

Paul is addressing a foreseeable corollary of his teaching: if he proclaims that righteousness is not to be attained through observing the law, Jewish or any other, he could be understood to be inviting his converts to an amoral way of life. Paul has frequently been exploited by antinomian elements on the fringes of the Church, where licentiousness was claimed to be evidence of freedom from this world and possession by God’s spirit. To counter this danger, Paul posits love as the ethic which defines Christian living. Love needs to be understood, not as sentimental attachment to particular individuals, but as a firm commitment to living in relation to others, and identifying with them so that the wellbeing of the parties becomes coterminous. In quoting Lev 19:18 Paul is of course citing the law itself, and a particular statement therein which was widely understood to sum up the essence of the law, not least by Jesus (Mark 12:31). The alternative to love is internecine strife, with all the destruction it entails.

16 Live by the Spirit, I say, and do not gratify the desires of the flesh.¹⁷For what the flesh desires is opposed to the Spirit, and what the Spirit desires is opposed to the flesh; for these are opposed to each other, to prevent you from doing what you want. ¹⁸But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not subject to the law.

The dichotomy between flesh and spirit, as two incompatible ways of life, is quite common in ethical teaching of Paul’s day. It is not unique to Judaism, still less to Christianity. To simplify choices is a common way of encouraging and persuading people to take a particular direction or course of action.

¹⁹Now the works of the flesh are obvious: fornication, impurity, licentiousness, ²⁰idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, anger, quarrels, dissensions, factions, ²¹envy, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these. I am warning you, as I warned you before: those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Vice lists are quite common is moral teaching of the period. Some caution is required in identifying the particular attitudes or activities condemned, as the semantic range of words can fluctuate over time, and from place to place. We should therefore not impose too precise a definition on the various vices. What is certain is that Paul is referring not to isolated acts, but to ways of life governed by the various vices, if these are deemed to effect separation from God’s kingdom.

22 By contrast, the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, ²³gentleness, and self-control. There is no law against such things.

Similarly, Paul is speaking of ethical attitudes and ways of living and relating, rather than to specific deeds. Like vice lists, virtue lists were common in the ancient world. In Christian lists, love is consistently and prominently featured, and encapsulates the life of discipleship modelled on the example of Jesus.

²⁴And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.

The mystical connection between the death of Jesus and the lives of Christians is one of the defining motifs in Paul’s theology, the framework within which he connects and integrates disparate aspects of his teaching. Paul’s assertion that evil impulses are destroyed on conversion to Christ rests upon his dichotomising of the choices and decisions encountered in human life into two opposing options.

²⁵If we live by the Spirit, let us also be guided by the Spirit. ²⁶Let us not become conceited, competing against one another, envying one another.

As well as articulating again the two ways, the two choices Christians face in the world, Paul is also warning against the dangers of religious fervour and the sense of spiritual achievement that often results. Competitiveness in manifesting spiritual power was a potentially disruptive, divisive, and destructive force in the Church, when the gifts of the spirit are abused for personal gratification rather than used in building up the community and in furthering its mission.

6My brothers, if anyone is detected in a transgression, you who have received the Spirit should restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness. Take care that you yourselves are not tempted.

The responsibility for exercising discipline lies with the community, and those who are acknowledged as its leaders. The transgression could arise directly from abuse of the spiritual gifts, referred to previously, but is not necessarily restricted to such situations. The aim of discipline must be to restore relationships in the community, and the person who has erred is to be encouraged to resume an appropriate way of sharing in the life of the community. Those who exercise leadership and discipline are particularly prone to temptations, not least the abuse of power, and they need to take particular care to ensure that in the exercise of their responsibilities they do not themselves err.

²Bear one another’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfil the law of Christ.

The ethic of mutual support is an aspect of love, and essential to a life modelled on the example of Christ. The nature of the burdens with which Christians are to help each other is not specified, but must include debt and other financial difficulties, particularly in times of sickness and frailty, which would have rendered all but the most wealthy extremely vulnerable.

³For if those who are nothing think they are something, they deceive themselves.

Spiritual experiences often give rise to an exalted sense of importance, and an overbearing attitude towards others in the community. Religious organisations frequently attract inadequate people who respond to acceptance and encouragement by acquiring an exaggerated sense of their abilities and importance. While they deceive mostly themselves, they can do considerable damage to the community if they are indulged.

⁴All must test their own work; then that work, rather than their neighbour’s work, will become a cause for pride. ⁵For each must carry his own load.

Paul is calling the Galatian Christians to self-awareness, and the maturity to be self-critical is appraising their own achievements. As much as these attainments may become a source of pride, they remain responsible for the consequences of their own shortcomings. This is not a denial of Paul’s previous emphasis on the obligation of mutual support, but concerns the responsibility Christians have for their conduct, not their circumstances.

6 Those who are taught the word must share in all good things with their teacher.

The word here is the Gospel. Those who have benefited from being taught the Christian faith have an obligation to reciprocate the benefit. This may be the earliest reference we have to Christian leaders or teachers who were supported financially by the church. We have no other information about such people in Galatia, but they are presumably to be distinguished from those who have been responsible for leading the churches into a way of life contrary to that which Paul had taught.

7 Do not be deceived; God is not mocked, for you reap whatever you sow. ⁸If you sow to your own flesh, you will reap corruption from the flesh; but if you sow to the Spirit, you will reap eternal life from the Spirit. ⁹So let us not grow weary in doing what is right, for we will reap at harvest time, if we do not give up. ¹⁰So then, whenever we have an opportunity, let us work for the good of all, and especially for those of the family of faith.

In reinforcing the teaching of the preceding section of the letter, Paul draws a correlation between behaviour and its consequences. The choice between the two ways is not simply between two patterns of life, but between the eschatological consequences of those choices. Reciprocal obligation within the community, for the mutual benefit and spiritual wellbeing of all, is the essence of Christian corporate life.

11 See what large letters I make when I am writing in my own hand!

It is often understood that Paul at this point, or perhaps at the previous sentence, took the pen into his own hand, and wrote the concluding words himself. A trained scribe would have written neatly and economically to Paul’s dictation, minimising the consumption of expensive materials. In writing the closing words himself Paul may be less neat, but this personalises the communication, rather like a signature at the end of a typed or word-processed letter.

¹²It is those who want to make a good showing in the flesh that try to compel you to be circumcised—only that they may not be persecuted for the cross of Christ. ¹³Even the circumcised do not themselves obey the law, but they want you to be circumcised so that they may boast about your flesh. ¹⁴May I never boast of anything except the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. ¹⁵For neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is anything; but a new creation is everything! ¹⁶As for those who will follow this rule—peace be upon them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.

Paul sums up the contents of the letter, suggesting that those who have influenced the Galatian Christians towards a way of life which includes observance of the Jewish law are motivated by self-interest, to avoid persecution and to impress others with their success in mission. Against them Paul argues that they do not observe the law themselves, but seek credit for imposing it on others. Whether or not Paul is fair or accurate in his allegations, he offers as the defining pattern of Christian one which is defined by the crucifixion of Jesus.

17 From now on, let no one make trouble for me; for I carry the marks of Jesus branded on my body.

Paul refers to the scars of wounds inflicted in the course of his Christian mission, which he identifies mystically with those inflicted on Jesus at his crucifixion.

18 May the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, brothers. Amen.