Bible Groups - Digests of Bible Commentaries

Paul's Letter to the Galatians

BACKGROUND: History & Culture of Galatians - Hellenised immigrants + Jews

Background to Paul's Letter - Why Read Galatians?

1 Very brief intro, no thanksgiving - cf 1 Thess. First argument move: claims to be Apostle commissioned directly by divine revelation; not (emphatic 3^rd word of letter, used nowhere else in this way) from or through men. Brief statement of faith & authority: life-giving Father uniquely raised Jesus.
2 Attaches co-senders - not just Paul, tho writes as "I". Implies prior discussion. Sent to "churches" - presumably 1 copy carried from church to church and read out in full at each. Unlikely multiple copies with Paul's own writing in each. ekklesia = assembly, as in Greek cities; distinct from synagogue and Greek temple gatherings.
3 Charis = grace, but includes mercy, pardon: suggests Jewish-Christian rather than diaspora. "Peace" = shalom = blessed with well-being. The letter is all about God's grace and peace: how has God given us grace and made peace with us? Through Christ's death and resurrection which set us free. No other means. We must keep the moral laws of the OT but the ceremonial laws are no longer needed.
4 Life-drama typical of culture: script by God; scene "this evil world"; characters; events; conflicts. "Evil world" vs future world of blessed-ness. Jesus gave himself to eliminate the death-bearing effects of our sins. Just how Jesus delivers us not spelt out. But God's will is not to be denied. Delivery enables different life-style.
5 Replaces usual grace & peace on recipients by a theological doxology. Emphasises theology in this letter and authority from God for it.
6 This verse would have come as a shock. Usual "thanksgiving" or relationship section omitted. Problem stated immediately: they are rebuked for turning from the gospel Paul taught them. (Later we find the actual problem: the Galatians are being persuaded that justification or righteousness can only be obtained by embracing Judaism, and demonstrated by circumcision. Present tense implies process begun and ongoing. Important for us to realise that what they are being told was very persuasive (Cf Gen 17), and so it takes enormous effort by Paul to argue against it.
7 Not just "another" gospel, but turning away from the 1 true gospel, which is the only true gospel, and therefore they are turning from God. Implied is that they are being persuaded that Paul's gospel will not deliver them from God's wrath. "Gospel" is already by now a technical term for what God is doing through the death & resurrection of Jesus Christ. Turning away from it is not good news!
8 A strong repeated curse - "anathema" on anyone who preaches a different gospel - even himself - from that which "we" - Paul and his co-workers - preached. Gospel is more than "good news" - it includes judgement, as here. Gospel is both what Christ preached - and Christ himself: it is the proclamation that God created salvation in the event of Christ's death and resurrection. Hence turning away from the true gospel excludes from salvation. This is the core of Paul's letter.
9 Repeats for emphasis, but now real "anyone" and "which you accepted".
10 A puzzle! Is he trying to persuade (i) people and God; (ii) neither people nor God; (iii) people but not God; (iv) God not people? Paul rejects implied criticism that he is watering down the gospel in order to win converts.
11 Gospel preached by Paul is not of human origin. Its character is not that of a human construct; it did not result from meditation or reason. It irrupted on him unexpectedly from the divine. but he was not totally unprepared, as an educated Jew & Pharisee.
12 He received it directly by revelation from Jesus Christ. What is he claiming to have received? His vision of the risen Christ gave him the insight that in raising Christ God was raising the whole of creation, and so the beginning of the new age as expected by Jews. This insight compelled him to take the message of Christ crucified-and-raised to the Gentiles. Paul explicitly rejects the 2 ways the church has usually legitimised teaching: received (as tradition - but see 1 Cor 15) and teaching. But here he is referring to the Law and Scriptures (ie OT), in contrast God has revealed his Son directly to him, ie faith in Christ supercedes previous teaching and tradition. The convincing power of the gospel (as revelation of Christ) comes not from the preacher's personality but from the gospel's content, which brings salvation.
13 Emphasises the startling change by reminding of his previous behaviour. He was a zealous persecutor - "to the limit" - of the Jesus-movement, which he now calls the "church (ekklesia) of God". In OT ekklesia is the assembly of Israel, called and gathered to worship, hear God's word, fight and make decisions. Term now used of those Jews and Gentiles called by God.
14 In comparing Paul's account, written at the time in the middle of history, with Luke's in Acts, we should remember that Luke was writing later, in the 80s, and from hearsay, after Jerusalem and its Christian Church had been destroyed in 66-70. Luke then knows that the Gentile Church has prevailed and separated from Judaism - Paul is struggling for the success of his mission to the Gentiles. As a Pharisee Paul was pledged to be zealous for the Law, so freedom from the Law had enormous meaning for Paul.
15 Sees himself as set apart ( cf Isa 49:6; Isa 52:7; Jer 1:5, 10) from conception by God for his mission to the Gentiles, ie as a prophet.
16 OT meanings of God's "Son" (Israel, David, righteous Israelite) imply special intimacy and faithfulness. Whether Paul ever believed in the preexistence of the Son we don't know. From Gal clearly Paul saw God's Son as the anointed one, christos, whom God raised from the dead. Only later did Christians come to see Jesus as God's Son. A very particular revelation of God's Son (=anointed one) to Paul "in me". As in Rom 1:9, Paul sees the Son as gospel, the revelation of the righteous one (Rom 1:17). So using "Son" here already implies he is the righteousness of God (2 Cor 1:30; 2 Cor 5:21) which comes by faith and not from the Law.
Paul does not claim that he was specifically instructed to preach to the Gentiles. Only that God revealed his Son "so that" Paul might do this - Paul came to see that this was God's purpose in revealing the Son to Paul. V 16 about Son and gospel contrasts with his previous zeal for the Law - anticipating his argument of faith not the Law.
17 Paul is not emphasising his revelation, but on how he responded to it. He did not confer but went away. Is he saying he went away to confer with God, ie to think it through? What he did not do speaks of his complete confidence in the authority of the revelation he had received. "Arabia" probably means Nabatea, south of Damascus, south-east of the Dead Sea (Cf 2 Cor 11:32 which suggests he was preaching there). This is Paul's chief account of his conversion (Cf Acts 9 & 26). Paul has to admit "apostles before me" but does admit they have greater standing than himself.
18 "Then" marks a new episode - after 3 years. Cephas = Kephas = Petros = rock in Greek & Aramaic. "to visit" - with overtones of enquire or examine. Probably should be seen as 2 teachers "checking each other out". Perhaps also gaining first info about Jesus and his ministry. Paul gives impression he took initiative, but does say why or why at this time. Paul's use of Kephas, the Greek form of the Aramaic does not call attention to Peter's special role as "rock", ie petros (if he knew of it - it may have been a late addition in Mt).
19 Stayed 15 days, hence included 2 Sundays, yet did not "see" anyone except Peter & James. James was not an Apostle in Jesus' lifetime, but did witness the resurrection (1 Cor 15:7). James was martyred in 62 (Josephus Antiquities 20.200).
20 Contrast: mentions 15 days then swears saw noone else, so the Jerusalem leaders/community could not have commissioned or legitimated what Paul is doing in Damascus - his independence is not threatened by this visit. Stresses he was already an Apostle before this visit, which was a private visit. Yet in 1 Cor 15:3 he says he "handed on what he first received". Here he recognises that his identity as apostle - and hence his authority - depends on his membership of the wider group of apostles.
21 11 or 14 years in Syria & Cilicia - around Antioch and Tarsus - are significant. It appears that the gospel was first preached to Gentiles in Antioch (Acts 11:20), hence the need to call them Christians. Apparently excludes any visit to Jerusalem during this time, contradicting Luke (Acts 11:30), who may have misplaced it: unlikely Paul would omit such an important visit, bringing money to the Jerusalem Church.
22 His face was unknown in Judea, but no suggestion of any discord at this time.
23 But the Christians in Judea had heard about his work. pistis - faith, as characterising the Christian message. Not much used in OT or Jewish writings, so not used to characterise Judaism - distinctive aspect of Christians. pistis means being persuaded; believing; relying; having confidence in; trusting; being committee to; being faithful. Requires deliberate decision which distances Christian from Jewish or pagan world which previously gave them identity. Cf "proclaiming faith" here with "proclaiming his Son" in v 16. Not "the faith" - there is only one faith, for Paul, ie the gospel is faith in Christ, the anointed one, the Son of God. There is no faith apart from apart from this content.
24 They gave glory to God for it. Thus confirming that Paul is preaching the same gospel as was understood in Jerusalem.