The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown (99 page)

The Nature of the Atonement
Galatians 3:10—14 is one of the clearest statements in the NT on the substitutionary nature of Jesus' death. Those who rely on the works of the law for salvation are under a divine curse. In order to be deemed righteous through one's fidelity to the law, a person has to fulfill all of the law all of the time. Interpreted in light of
Deut 27:26, the fact that Jesus died by crucifixion demonstrates that he bore the curse of believing sinners in their place. Thus, Jesus granted forgiveness to sinners by suffering the penalty for their sins so that they might escape God's wrath.

The Transformation of the Believer
Paul's Jewish opponents in Galatia likely argued that the law was necessary to restrain the sinful conduct of believers. His libertine opponents argued that since believers are saved through faith alone, their personal lifestyles do not matter to God. Paul countered both errors in Galatians by stressing the dramatic change that takes place in the life of the believer. Paul reminded the believers that God had granted his Spirit to them when they placed their faith in Christ (3:2). The Spirit had manifested his presence among them through amazing miracles (3:5). The indwelling Spirit was the source of the personal righteousness for which true believers aspire (5:5). The Spirit leads the believer to live a life characterized by spiritual fruit, which satisfies and even exceeds the law's moral demands (5:22). The fact that love is the primary expression of the Spirit is significant because love is the essence of the law (5:13—15; see Lev 19:18). This transformation produced by the Spirit is so dramatic and radical that Paul described it as “a new creation” (6:15), echoing the new covenant promises of Ezek 11:19—20; 36:26-27. The new creation effected by the Spirit in the believer serves as the standard, the rule, according to which the believer lives (Gal 6:16).
⁵⁸
Consequently, the gospel that Paul preached was not a license for sinful behavior but the impetus for true righteous living.

The Identity of Jesus
Galatians reflects a high Christology. The unique identity of Jesus appears even in the first verse of the letter when Paul insists that he was made an apostle not “by man, but by Jesus Christ.” The contrast has the effect of identifying Jesus as someone far greater than a mere man, great prophet, or divine spokesman, and it hints at both his supremacy and deity. Four times the letter calls Jesus God's “Son” (1:16; 2:20;
4:4, 6).
It also repeatedly assigns to Jesus the title “Lord,” a title of deity that was the preferred substitute for the name Yahweh in Jewish Greek texts as well as in Paul's letters.
⁵⁹

If Galatians is indeed the earliest of Paul's letters and perhaps even the earliest NT document, this high Christology is even more significant. The letter clearly demonstrates that a high Christology was not a product of theological evolution in which Jesus grew from a mere man to semidivine to divine as stories about him were embellished and descriptions of him were exaggerated. Rather, the earliest Christology is a high Christology because Jesus himself claimed and demonstrated his deity before his earliest followers.

CONTRIBUTION TO THE CANON

• Gentiles included in the church on equal terms with the Jews (3:28); circumcision not required, contrary to the “false gospel” of the Judaizers (1:6—9; 6:15)
  
• Paul's confrontation of Peter regarding the inclusion of the Gentiles, most likely prior to the Jerusalem Council (2:11—14; see Acts 15)
  
• Justification by faith apart from works of the law (see 2:15; 3:24); demonstration from Scripture that Abraham was also justified by faith apart from works (3:1-4:7, esp. 3:6 citing Gen 15:6)
  
• Defense of Christian freedom from the demands of the law (5:1—15)
  
• Teaching on life in the Spirit and the fruit of the Spirit (5:16-26)
  

STUDY QUESTIONS

1. What are some indications that Galatians has exerted enormous influence on Christianity?
   
2. What are the two possible destinations for Galatians?
   
3. What is the support for each of these possibilities?
   
4. How are the destination and the dating of Galatians interrelated?
   
5. What are the two major theories regarding the destination of Galatians?
   
6. According to the authors, was Galatians written most likely before or after the Jerusalem Council? What evidence supports this claim?
   
7. What was Paul's primary purpose in writing Galatians?
   
8. Who were the Judaizers?
   
9. What was their message?
   
10. Why did Paul rebuke the Galatians?
    
11. What did Paul teach in Galatians concerning justification by faith versus works of the law?
    
12. What contributions to the canon does Galatians make?
    

FOR FURTHER STUDY

Betz, H. D.
Galatians.
Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979.

Bruce, F. F.
The Epistle to the Galatians.
New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982.

Dunn, J. D. G.
The Epistle to the Galatians.
Black's New Testament Commentary. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1993.

___________.
The Theology of Paul's Letter to the Galatians.
Cambridge: University Press, 1993.

Fung, R. Y. K.
The Epistle to the Galatians.
New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988.

George, T.
Galatians.
New American Commentary. Nashville: B&H, 1994.

Hansen, G. W. “Galatians, Letter to the.” Pages 323—34 in
Dictionary of Paul and His Letters.
Edited by G. F. Hawthorne, R. P. Martin, and D. G. Reid. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1993.

Hays, R. B.
The Faith of Jesus Christ: The Narrative Substructure of Galatians 3:1—4:11.
2d ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002.

__________. “The Letter to the Galatians: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections.” Pages 181—348 in
New Interpreter's Bible.
Vol. 11. Edited by L. E. Keck. Nashville: Abingdon, 2000.

Hove, R.
Equality in Christ? Galatians 3:28 and the Gender Dispute.
Wheaton: Crossway, 1999.

Longenecker, B. W.
The Triumph of Abrahams God: The Transformation of Identity in Galatians.
Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1998.

Longenecker, R. N.
Galatians.
Word Biblical Commentary 41. Dallas: Word, 1990.

Martyn, J. L.
Galatians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary.
Anchor Bible 33A. New York: Doubleday, 1997.

Morris, L.
Galatians: Paul's Charter of Christian Freedom.
Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1996.

Nanos, M., ed.
The Galatians Debate: Contemporary Issues in Rhetorical and Historical Interpretation.
Peabody: Hendrickson, 2002.

Richards, E. R.
Paul and First-Century Letter Writing: Secretaries, Composition and Collection.
Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2004.

Silva, M.
Interpreting Galatians: Explorations in ExegeticalMethod.
2d ed. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001.

Thielman, F.
From Plight to Solution: A Jewish Framework for Understanding Paul's View of the Law in Galatians andRomans.
Novum Testamentum Supplement 61. Leiden: Brill, 1989.

Witherington, B., III.
Grace in Galatia: A Commentary on Paul's Letter to the Galatians.
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998.

¹
C. B. Cousar,
Galatians
, Interpretation (Atlanta: John Knox, 1982), 1.

²
G. W. Hansen, “Galatians, Letter to the,” in
Dictionary of Paul and His Letters
, ed. G. F. Hawthorne, R. P. Martin, and D. G. Reid (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1993), 323.

³
G. Duncan,
The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians
(London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1934), xvii.

⁴
R. N. Longenecker,
Galatians
, WBC 41 (Dallas: Word, 1990), xliii.

⁵
L. Morris's description of Galatians is apt when he called the letter “Paul's charter of Christian freedom” (the subtitle of
Galatians: Paul's Charter of Christian Freedom
[Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1996]).

⁶
A. Cole,
The Epistle of St. Paul to the Galatians
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), 57.

⁷
The issues of the authorship of Galatians and its provenance, destination, and date are significantly interrelated, as will become clear in the following integrated discussion below.

⁸
H. Ridderbos,
St. Paul's Epistle to the Churches of Galatia
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953), 35.

⁹
B. Bauer,
Kritik derpaulinischen Briefe
(Berlin: Hempel, 1852).

¹⁰
L. G. Rylands,
A Critical Analysis of the Four Chief Pauline Epistles
(London: Watts, 1929), 273-367; F. R. McGuire, “Did Paul Write Galatians?”
Hibbert Journal 66
(1967—68): 52—57. See the discussions in D. Guthrie,
New Testament Introduction
(Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1990), 485; W. G. Kümmel,
Introduction to the New Testament
, rev. ed., trans. H. C. Kee (Nashville: Abington, 1975), 304.

¹¹
F. C. Baur,
Paul: His Life and Works
(London: Williams and Norgate, 1875), 1.246.

¹²
J. B. Lightfoot,
St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians
, 10th ed. (London: Macmillan, 1921), 57-62. Cf. E. De Witt Burton,
A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians
, ICC (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1921), lxviii—lxix.

¹³
Longenecker,
Galatians
, lviii.

¹⁴
J. C. O'Neill,
The Recovery of Paul's Letter to the Galatians
(London: SPCK, 1972). For a good summary of the book, see Longenecker,
Galatians
, lviii—lix.

¹⁵
W. O. Walker Jr., “Galatians 2:7b-8 as a Non-Pauline Interpolation,”
CBQ
65 (2003): 568-87.

¹⁶
E. Dinkler, “Der Brief an die Galater: Zum Kommentar von Heinrich Schlier,”
Verkündigung und Forschung
1—3 (1953—55): 175—83, especially 182—83, reprinted with “Nachtrag” in his
Signum Crucis: Aufsätze zum Neuen Testament und zur christlichen Archäologie
(Tübingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 1967), 270—82, esp. 278—80.

¹⁷
R. Hays (“The Letter to the Galatians: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections,”
NIB
11:226) rejected the theory completely. O. Cullmann (
Peter: Disciple-Apostle-Martyr: A Historical and Theological Study
, trans. F. V. Filson [London: SCM, 1953], 18) supported the theory, and H. D. Betz (
Galatians
, Hermeneia [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979],
97)
accepted the theory with some modifications. Compare F. F. Bruce,
The Epistle to the Galatians
, NIGTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 120-21.

¹⁸
The verb
pepisteumai
(“entrusted”) with the accusative case appears only in Pauline literature (1 Cor 9:17; 1 Thess 2:4; 1 Tim 1:11; Titus 1:3). The contrast between “circumcision” and “uncircumcision” is characteristically Pauline, appearing outside of Paul's letters only in Acts 11:2—3. The noun
apostole
(“apostolate”) appears only in Pauline literature except for Acts 1:25. See U. Wilkens, “Der Ursprung der Überlieferung der Erscheinungen des Auferstandenen: Zur traditionsge-schichtlichen Analyse von 1 Kor 15, 1—11,” in
Dogma und Denkstrukturen. Edmund Schlink in Verehrung und Dankbarkeit zum sechzigsten Geburtstag dargebracht
, ed. W. Joest and W. Pannenberg (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1963), 72, n.41.

¹⁹
Most likely, the bare dative in Gal 2:8 is a dative of advantage that indicates God worked for the advantage of Peter and Paul. See
BDAG
, s.v. “\ill\.”

²⁰
As J. L. Martyn (
Galatians
, AB 32A [New York: Doubleday, 1997], 202) has explained, the two genitives are objective genitives that identify the persons who are being evangelized. Martyn suggested the translation “the gospel as it is directed to those who are not circumcised.” He added, “In these parallel clauses, then, Paul in no way suggests that there are two gospels. There are, rather, two missions in which the one gospel is making its way into the whole of the cosmos.”

²¹
See Longenecker,
Galatians
, 55; Bruce,
Galatians
, 120; Morris,
Galatians
, 75; T. George,
Galatians
, NAC (Nashville: B&H, 1994), 160-61; Lightfoot,
Galatians
, 109.

²²
B. Ehrman, “Cephas and Peter,”
JBL
109 (1990): 463—74, especially 469. Ehrman argued that Cephas is another figure distinct from the apostle Peter.

²³
The theory that associates Galatians 2 with Matt 16:16—19 was first advanced by J. Chapman, “St. Paul and Revelation to St. Peter, Matthew XVI. 17,”
Revue Bénédictine
29 (1912): 133-47. The theory was revived by D. Wenham,
Paul: Follower of Jesus or Founder of Christianity?
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 200—5.

²⁴
E. R. Richards,
Paul and First-Century Letter Writing: Secretaries, Composition and Collection
(Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity, 2004), 94-121.

²⁵
Cole,
Galatians
, 23.

²⁶
J. Moffatt,
An Introduction to the Literature of the New Testament
, 3d ed. (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1918), 90—101; Betz,
Galatians.

²⁷
Hansen, “Galatians,” 323. One ancient writer, Asterius (d. 340), did affirm the South Galatian theory. See the discussion in W. Ramsay, “The ‘Galatia’ of St. Paul and the ‘Galatic Territory’ of Acts,” in
Studia Biblica et Ecclesiastica IV
(Oxford: Clarendon, 1896), 16.

²⁸
Moffatt,
Introduction
, 93.

²⁹
F. F. Bruce, “Galatian Problems. 2. North or South Galatians?”
BJRL
52 (1970) 258; and id.,
Commentary on Galatians
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 10-13.

³⁰
Moffatt,
Introduction
, 93.